1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

3. Amount borrowed: Three billion won (300,000,000 won).

4. The defendant shall assist the plaintiff to purchase four special golf membership tickets in a single-lane.

- The location of a golf course: The name of a golf course of 1,220,000 square meters (18 square meters) in Hongcheon-gun, Gangwon-do: the interest shall not be paid if the loan amount D is supported to the Plaintiff by the special sale of four special members in a special way, and the Defendant who borrowed the loan shall pay the loan amount preferentially to the sale price.

The plaintiff shall pay the shortage.

If the above golf course is not authorized or constructed within two to three years, the borrower shall pay the principal and interest to the Plaintiff with the interest of 10% per annum.

On May 23, 2006, the defendant prepared a loan certificate with the following contents on the plaintiff.

(hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”). B.

On the same day, the plaintiff issued cashier's checks to the defendant 300 million won.

C. The Plaintiff, at the lower end of the copy of the above loan certificate, stated “The amount of money paid is repaid, but the relevant taxes shall be borne by the borrower (which shall be less than 20-30% compared to the total amount).”

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

2. Summary of the assertion

A. On May 23, 2006, the Plaintiff asserted the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim lent KRW 300 million to the Defendant on the terms and conditions of the loan stated in the instant loan certificate, and D had not completed the authorization and permission or construction until more than two to three years have passed since the date of loan.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff a loan of KRW 30 million and interest or delay damages from May 23, 2006.

B. Around 2002, the Defendant provided assistance to the redevelopment project promoted by the Plaintiff so that the PF loans necessary for the redevelopment project, and only received KRW 300 million on May 23, 2006 as part of the payment, and did not borrow KRW 300 million.

The loan certificate of this case is prepared formally at the request of the plaintiff.