1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Plaintiff’s assertion

On March 15, 1997, the Plaintiff leased the D ground buildings owned by the Defendant C at KRW 10,000,000,000 from each other, and resided at the same time until July 30, 2002.

However, as C died on or around December 2001, the Defendant demanded that the Plaintiff deliver the above building to the Plaintiff. On or around July 30, 2002, the Plaintiff received a loan certificate from the Defendant on or around July 30, 2002, which is KRW 10 million with respect to the loan deposit of KRW 10 million and the due date for repayment and January 30, 2004.

Since then, around December 11, 2005, the Defendant’s wife E provided the Plaintiff with a loan certificate of KRW 5 million (5 million), which is a part of the above loan loan, and the due date of repayment on March 30, 2006. The Plaintiff received payment from E.

Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay the remainder of five million won of loan and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

Judgment

The plaintiff, around March 15, 1997, leased D ground buildings owned by C and resided at the same time until July 30, 2002, after the plaintiff leased the building on or around July 30, 2002, Eul died on or around December 11, 2001, Eul delivered the plaintiff a loan amount of KRW 5 million on or around December 11, 2005, the due date of repayment of KRW 5 million to the plaintiff on or around March 30, 2006, following the conciliation in the related cases (the Government District Court Decision 2007Na9451). The debt to the plaintiff on December 11, 2005 against E based on the loan certificate was reduced to KRW 4 million, and the fact that E repaid to the plaintiff is not disputed between the parties, or the purport of the entire pleadings is recognized if there is no dispute between the parties, or the purport of the pleading in the items in subparagraphs 2 and 6.

However, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the deposit under the above lease agreement was due to the cause of KRW 10 million, but it is not sufficient to recognize the fact that the Defendant issued the Plaintiff a loan certificate with the loan amount of KRW 10 million on July 30, 2002 and the due date of payment on January 30, 2004, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion based on the above facts is without merit to examine further.

In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.