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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. From July 2003 to July 17, 2005, the Defendant entered into a lease contract with C as to the right-hand side of the first floor among the fourth floor buildings located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant building”) in Seongbuk-gu (hereinafter “instant building”) by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 400,000, monthly rent of KRW 400,000, and the lease term of KRW 18, 2003 from July 18, 2003 to July 17, 2005.

B. On May 30, 2004, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with C on the second, third, fourth, and underground floors of the instant building. On October 19, 2004, the Plaintiff’s East F entered into a lease agreement on the left-hand side of the first floor of the instant building.

C. On July 18, 2007, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 10,000,000 to the account of the Defendant’s community credit cooperatives.

On July 18, 2007, the Defendant: “The Defendant borrowed KRW 9,000,000 to the Plaintiff;” and the receipts of July 18, 2007, stating that “The Defendant received KRW 1,000,000 for the instant E deposit.” (hereinafter “the instant receipts”) from the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The gist of the parties’ assertion argues that the Plaintiff leased KRW 10,00,000 to the Defendant on July 18, 2007 upon request of the Defendant who was in a position where the deposit was not refunded by C, and on August 17, 2013, upon which the Plaintiff was due to due date. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff paid the lease deposit to the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff in the course of concluding a lease agreement with C to operate the entire first floor of the instant building as a private teaching institute and a child care center, and that it was only substituted by the Plaintiff’s payment of the lease deposit to C, and that there was no fact that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 10,00,000 from the Plaintiff.

B. The key issue of the instant case is a loan of KRW 10,000,000 that the Defendant received from the Plaintiff.