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. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant runs the sales business of private salt and related products.

The Plaintiff was sexual intercourse with the Defendant, and around November 2015, the Defendant sent KRW 20 million on November 27, 2015, to the Defendant’s account in the name of his/her father, after cancelling the National Pension, to the Defendant’s termination of the National Pension and transferring KRW 20 million on November 27, 2015.

At the time, the defendant agreed to pay all the above money after one year, and to give 300,000 won interest per month.

However, the defendant does not pay not only interest but also principal to the plaintiff, so that the above repayment period has expired.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the principal amounting to KRW 20 million and the damages for delay calculated from November 28, 2015, which is the day following the date of lending money.

B. From September 2015 to June 2016, the money claimed by the Plaintiff is the money received as living expenses at the time when the Plaintiff and the Defendant promised to remarried, and there was no fact that the Defendant borrowed money from the Plaintiff.

At the time, the Defendant used the said money as the pension rent, living expenses, expenses for the convalescent hospital with the Plaintiff’s mother, expenses for automobile maintenance, etc.

Before the filing of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff asserted that “the Defendant, by deceiving the Defendant to make a profit if he/she invests in the private capital business, and by deceiving the Defendant to acquire money KRW 20 million under the pretext of investment.” The Defendant filed a criminal complaint against the Defendant by fraud, but the disposition was made without suspicion (Evidence of Evidence).

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

2. On November 27, 2015, the fact that the Plaintiff remitted the total amount of KRW 20 million to the deposit account in the name of the Defendant’s wife C on two occasions on November 27, 2015 is no dispute between the parties.

(1) However, at the time of the above transfer, the fact that the plaintiff and the defendant lived together with the annual relationship does not conflict between the parties, and the loan certificate or investment contract stating the maturity and interest.