1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Defendant C shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 as well as its related amount.

Basic Facts

On August 20, 2009 and August 25, 2009, the registration of creation of a mortgage in the name of Defendant B, the father of Defendant B, was completed on August 20, 2009 with respect to the land of 112 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by Defendant C.

After that, on March 8, 2010, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of E was completed on March 3, 2010 on the instant land.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 100 million to Defendant C, and the recipient to E, a person who was sent on November 30, 2009.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (if there are serial numbers, including each serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff transferred KRW 100 million to defendant C, by borrowing KRW 100 million from defendant C's wife F, the plaintiff would refund the principal to the 1-month interest per month on the loan of KRW 100 million, thereby remitting the person who sent the end of defendant B as defendant C to pay KRW 100 million.

In addition, Defendant C agreed on June 19, 2012 to pay the above principal amount of KRW 30 million in addition to the above principal amount of KRW 100 million, and the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the above loan amount of KRW 100 million and delay damages.

Defendant B’s assertion by the Defendants at the request of Defendant B, his father, and lent KRW 200 million to Defendant C. After Defendant B received only KRW 100 million from F, Defendant B received a letter of claim that he transferred the ownership of the instant land to accord in kind when it is unable to repay the remainder of KRW 100 million and interest KRW 30 million. Accordingly, the ownership of the instant land was transferred.

Therefore, the subject of the Plaintiff’s loan of KRW 100 million is not Defendant C or F, nor Defendant B.

Defendant C’s assertion that the instant land was sold in KRW 200 million to Defendant C, who represented on August 20, 2009, and in order to prevent Defendant C from disposing of the instant land during the resale to a third party at the request of Defendant B.