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. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 6,300,000, which the Plaintiff agreed to pay on March 19, 2014, and the delay damages therefrom, barring any special circumstance.

The Plaintiff has operated the “C” human resources supply office in the way that he/she supplies labor workers at the construction site and pays 90% of the labor cost in advance from the construction company after paying the total amount of the labor cost.

In April 2013, the Defendant received labor workers from the Plaintiff several times and performed the construction work after serving as a public official in charge at the scene of the new construction work in Gangnam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City D New Construction site, where the construction of Greenland (hereinafter referred to as the “Danland Construction”).

B. For the advance payment of labor costs to the above workers, the Plaintiff remitted the total amount of KRW 8,687,00,000 to the Defendant’s account, including KRW 1,305,00 on March 11, 2013, KRW 2,610,00 on March 18, 2013, KRW 2,00,00 on March 28, 2013, and KRW 8,72,000 on April 16, 2013.

Afterwards, the Plaintiff urged the Defendant to pay the above labor cost in lieu of the construction of Greenland, if the construction of Greenland did not pay the above labor cost.

C. On March 19, 2014, the Defendant expected to complete the completion of construction, and prepared a loan certificate stating that the Defendant would pay 6,300,000 won out of the above money to C by March 31, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The main point of the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant prepared a loan certificate to the Plaintiff is merely an intentional preparation of the Plaintiff’s assertion in order to think that, upon completion of construction, the Plaintiff would immediately be paid money from Greenland Construction or Greenland Construction E to whom the claim of Greenland Construction or Greenland Construction was acquired, and to know the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant did not borrow the above money from the plaintiff.