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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

The fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 20,000,000 to the Defendant on October 22, 2014 (hereinafter “the instant money”) does not conflict between the parties.

The plaintiff asserts that the instant money is a loan to the defendant.

The defendant asserts that the plaintiff invested the money of this case in the illegal sports earth site through the defendant.

Judgment

If the purport of the entire argument is added to the evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the Plaintiff’s delivery of the instant money to Nonparty C and D’s illegal sports earth site as investment funds through the Defendant. C and D paid KRW 900,000 to the Plaintiff on November 2014 and December 12, 2014, but the subsequent gambling site’s operation became difficult, and upon C’s arrest in March 2015, the site’s operation was suspended, and C and D committed a crime against the Plaintiff on the business failure on December 2015.

According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to deem the instant money to be an investment in the illegal gambling site, and it cannot be viewed differently from the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff's claim for the decision is dismissed as there is no reason.

The judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable in its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.