2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. On January 10, 2013, the Plaintiff respectively remitted KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s name account and KRW 50 million to the F’s name account.

B. On February 6, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a loan certificate with the following content (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”).

Amount:10 million won: On January 11, 2013, the interest of the month at the time of borrowing the above amount shall be paid either 3.75% to 10% on the last day of each month.

b. The obligor’s notification three months prior to the time of the obligor’s demand for the repayment of principal and the obligee’s agreement to immediately pay the principal on the date on which the three-month notice is given. 50,000 won shall be paid by May 4, 2013.

Creditors: The plaintiff and the debtor: The fact that there is no dispute over the defendant [based for recognition], each entry in Gap 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion

A. According to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 100 million and delay damages to the Plaintiff according to the contents of the loan certificate of this case.

B. The defendant's assertion that the defendant did not borrow KRW 100 million from the plaintiff, and the above money is merely an investment money directly invested by the plaintiff to D through the defendant.

3. Determination

A. The fact that the loan certificate of this case was prepared between the plaintiff and the defendant is as seen earlier.

On the other hand, the following circumstances are recognized in full view of the descriptions of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 1, 2, and 5 (including paper numbers), and the purport of testimony and the whole pleadings of witnesses of the first instance court and the trial court C.

① The Plaintiff was aware of C through the Defendant, and was able to listen to a talk about D’s money through futures option investment.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff, along with the Defendant, C, etc. on January 10, 2013, transferred the amount of KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s account on the same day, and KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s account, and KRW 50 million to C’s account.

② The Plaintiff appears to have regarded D as uneasying the fact that D deposits into E’s account, which is an employee in charge of accounting, and requested D to deliver the investment amount clearly to D, and distributed the money by dividing it into the Defendant and F’s account.