1. The plaintiff's claim that is changed in exchange in the trial is dismissed.

2. The costs of the trial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 14, 2014, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with D, as a broker of the Plaintiff’s mother, to sell the return KRW 1,137 square meters in Gyeyang-gun E (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). At the time, the Defendant agreed to pay the down payment of KRW 20 million in the contract date, and the intermediate payment of KRW 10 million in the intermediate payment of KRW 180 million on February 21, 2014, respectively, on March 31, 2014.

B. D transferred the down payment of KRW 20 million to a bank account in the name of C on January 14, 2014, and C transferred KRW 10 million to the Defendant’s account on the following day.

C. On February 21, 2014, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 20 million to the account under the name of the Defendant (hereinafter “instant remittance”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3 and 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. D did not pay the intermediate payment at the time of the intermediate payment, the Defendant demanded C to the effect that “I have contracted another land, but if I have not paid the intermediate payment, I have lent money to C, and that C lent money to the Defendant by lending money from the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff made the instant remittance to the Defendant.

B. After the instant sales contract was terminated, C transferred to the Plaintiff the loan claim amounting to KRW 10 million remaining after deducting the amount of KRW 10 million, which was paid in advance by the Defendant, under the name of refund of the intermediary commission and incidental expenses paid in advance from the Defendant.

C. Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the acquisition money and its delay damages to the plaintiff.

3. First of all, as to whether C lent KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff, in light of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1, 2-1, 2-3, each of the descriptions of evidence Nos. 1, 5, 11, and 12 is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit without examining the remainder of the issue.

4. If so, the plaintiff's claim as changed in the trial.