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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. From November 3, 2014 to July 27, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) remitted total of KRW 21,587,111 to the Defendant over 32 occasions; (b) donated KRW 1,091,111 among them; and (c) the remainder of KRW 20,496,00 by clearly ascertaining the Defendant’s specific purpose of use.

However, the defendant only paid 410,000 won out of 20,496,000 won to the plaintiff, but did not pay 20,086,000 won to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the loan amounting to KRW 20,086,00 and damages for delay.

B. Determination 1) In a case where it is not clear whether the Plaintiff transferred money due to the failure to prepare a written contract, loan certificate, etc. between the parties, it should be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules and common sense of society by taking into account various circumstances, such as the relationship between the parties, the process and motive of receiving money, the parties’ purpose and true intent, transaction practices, etc. Furthermore, even though there is no dispute as to the fact that the Plaintiff received money, if the Plaintiff asserts that the cause of receiving money is a loan for consumption, and the Defendant asserts that it was a loan for consumption, the fact that it was received through a loan for consumption is proved by the Plaintiff (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972). 2) The Plaintiff asserts that it was received through a loan for consumption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Nov. 3, 2014).

However, on the other hand, in light of the following circumstances, the Plaintiff’s statement Nos. 1 and 2 as well as the overall purport of the pleadings, which can be seen in light of the following circumstances, alone, is the Defendant.