대여금
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.
2. After an appeal is filed.
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is that the plaintiff's monetary lending of Gap evidence Nos. 7, 10, and 13, which is insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's monetary lending due to additional evidence in the court of first instance, and this court's determination on the plaintiff's conjunctive claim added in this court is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30 million and delay damages therefrom in accordance with the aforementioned agreement, since the Plaintiff’s transfer of the money to the Defendant was a new agreement to the effect that the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for and return the invested principal even though it was an investment amount, as otherwise alleged by the Defendant.
The Plaintiff’s preliminary claim is without merit, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that there exists an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the return of KRW 30 million solely with the statement of evidence No. 8.
3. The decision of the court of first instance, which dismissed the plaintiff's primary claim, shall be dismissed as it is without merit. The plaintiff's primary claim is just and it is not reasonable to do so, and the plaintiff's appeal and the preliminary claim added to this court are all dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.