1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 18, 2002, the Plaintiff married with C on December 18, 2002, but divorced around 2017, and the Defendant is a child born between C and the entire husband.

B. On September 10, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 20 million from his bank account to the Defendant’s bank account.

[Recognitions: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The plaintiff asserts that he lent the above KRW 20 million to the defendant as a house purchase fund.

The fact that the plaintiff remitted 20 million won to the defendant is as seen earlier. However, in light of the following circumstances where the plaintiff knew the whole purport of the pleadings in the above macroscopic evidence and the statements in subparagraphs 3 and 5, the evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff lent the above money to the defendant, and there is no other evidence to support this otherwise, the above argument by the plaintiff is without merit.

① The Defendant asserts that, rather than a loan, the Plaintiff received KRW 20 million from C to make a donation of KRW 10 million as a marriage fund. In fact, C transferred KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff on September 10, 2012, and C filed a lawsuit of divorce, etc. against the Plaintiff around 2015, and the Plaintiff filed a counterclaim against C. In light of the legal brief (Evidence B No. 3) submitted by the Plaintiff at the appellate court of the said lawsuit, the Plaintiff spent the above KRW 20 million paid to the Defendant for the purpose of supporting marriage fund and apartment purchase fund, and around 2012, C appears to have not been in a relationship with the Plaintiff. In full view of the above, the Defendant’s assertion is acceptable.

② Around July 2017, the Plaintiff brought a judicial divorce with C, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on September 21, 2017, and no circumstance seems to exist to require the Defendant to return the said KRW 20 million prior to the filing of the lawsuit.

The plaintiff.