1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff transferred the Defendant’s spouse F to D (hereinafter “D”) totaling KRW 500,000,000 on April 18, 2007, and KRW 200,000,000 on September 11, 2007, where the Defendant’s spouse F was a representative director.

B. On September 17, 2007, the Plaintiff and D concluded an agreement with regard to the above money under the Defendant’s joint and several sureties (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with the following terms and conditions (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

1. The Plaintiff shall invest KRW 500,000,00 in D with respect to the business of constructing multi-family housing in Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Gwangju (hereinafter “instant business”).

2. D shall pay KRW 500,000,000 of the Plaintiff’s investment principal at the time of the instant business-related PF loan.

3. The plaintiff's earnings shall be 100%, and the settlement time of earnings shall be when D receives earnings from the business of this case.

C. D did not obtain a PE loan in relation to the instant project, and was deemed dissolved on December 2, 2013 pursuant to Article 520-2(1) of the Commercial Act.

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

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion invested KRW 500,000,000 in D on the ground that D would receive a PF loan in relation to the instant business by return of the investment amount.

However, since D was dissolved without receiving the PF loan and the maturity date for the said investment loan arrives, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable with D to pay the above KRW 500,000,000 to the Plaintiff as a joint and several surety under the instant agreement.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion 1) D decided to return KRW 500,000,000 to the Plaintiff on condition that the Plaintiff will receive the instant PE loan in connection with the instant business. However, as D was dissolved without obtaining the instant PE loan, and the said condition was not fulfilled, the Defendant is not obligated to return the said KRW 500,000 to the Plaintiff. 2) Moreover, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are the same business for the instant business.