1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. On February 5, 2015, the Plaintiff deposited a total of KRW 12,200,000 in the Defendant’s bank account, KRW 5.2 million on May 19, 2015, KRW 100,000 on December 30, 2015, KRW 500,000 on February 11, 2016, and KRW 50,000 on April 18, 2016.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1-5 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff alleged that he lent the above KRW 12.2 million to the defendant, but it is not sufficient to recognize that the plaintiff lent the above money to the defendant only with the above deposit fact and the statement of Gap evidence No. 2 (Evidence of Contents). There is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Rather, in light of the following facts, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff paid the above money to the Defendant in return for the payment of the remainder of the pleadings, etc. in consideration of the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 2-1 through 10, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4, and Eul evidence Nos. 5-31, 32, Eul evidence Nos. 6 and 7, respectively.

① In around the end of 2014, the Plaintiff met the Defendant who was working as an employee at the place where the Plaintiff entered the bank located in Seocheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun.

The plaintiff and the defendant have been only about two years from them, and the plaintiff transferred the above money to the defendant for only two years with the defendant.

② From around July 2016, the Plaintiff sent 50,000 won to the Defendant’s bank account two times from around July 2016, when the Defendant did not know well.

Around September of the same year, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for a loan claim amounting to KRW 12,200,000,000 with the Daejeon District Court of Hongsung-gun, Daejeon District Court 201Da893 around November of the same year, where the Defendant would return the said money again to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant’s account was reported as an accident account and the Plaintiff would be suspended from paying the money.

After that, the Defendant’s Plaintiff, who was unable to pressure the Plaintiff, cancelled the provisional seizure and withdrawn the said lawsuit on December of the same year.

③ After the withdrawal of the above suit, the Plaintiff may demand a loan from the phone call with the Defendant.