1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. On August 10, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around August 10, 2012, the Defendant: (b) stated that “C’s wife (B) shall repay the amount paid to D, approximately three years; and (c) written undertaking, stating the Defendant’s husband and the Defendant’s husband’s date of birth and name (hereinafter “instant undertaking”) and delivered it to the Plaintiff.

[Judgment of the court below] The ground for recognition is without merit, Gap evidence No. 1, and the ground for appeal

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff had a claim for a loan of KRW 14 million against the Defendant at the time of making up the instant promise with continuous and repeated transactions for lending money to the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 14 million and delayed payment damages.

B. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion did not borrow KRW 14 million from the Plaintiff, but merely borrowed KRW 1 million prior to 1997, and the Defendant paid off all of them by installments until September 24, 2012, including interest at a high rate.

3. Therefore, as to whether the Defendant, at the time of preparing and delivering the instant undertaking to the Plaintiff, bears the obligation of KRW 14 million against the Plaintiff, the part of the amount of KRW 14 million evidence No. 1 (hereinafter “gold KRW 1400,000”) which seems consistent with this, cannot be used as evidence since there is no evidence to prove the authenticity. The statement of KRW 3 as well as the testimony of the witness A as to the witness D, may be easily believed in light of the relationship with the Plaintiff and D, the content of the testimony (the content that the witness stated that he had the obligation of KRW 14 million against the Defendant from the Plaintiff), and there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise. Furthermore, there is no evidence to specify the obligation that the Defendant is liable against the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

4. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit.