The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasoning for the court's explanation of this case in this case is as follows: (a) the 3rd part of the first instance court's 6th part of the 3rd part of the 3rd part of the 3rd part of the 3rd part of the 3rd part of the 1st instance judgment " this case", and (b) the 9th part of the 9th part "Min case" respectively, and (c) the 2nd part of the 3rd part of the 1st part of the 9th part of

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was merely limited to the money that the Defendant lent to the account in the name of D, 30 million won, which was personally lent to Ha, South Korea, and was not paid on the basis of the instant notarial deed.

B. In full view of the evidence mentioned earlier and the evidence set forth in Gap evidence Nos. 14, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, 10, 11, and 12 (including paper numbers), and the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to the witness H’s testimony in the first instance trial, it is reasonable to deem that the defendant transferred KRW 30 million to the account in the name of D was paid on the basis of the notarial deed in this case.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

1) 원ㆍ피고의 대화내용을 녹음한 녹취록(갑 제14호증)에 의하면, 원고는 이 사건 대여금의 변제를 독촉하는 내용증명을 받은 직후인 2018. 7. 17. 피고에게 ’저는 나름대로 보증도 써 가지고 지가 어렵다는 해결 해가 그 돈도 그때 H이가 돈을 가져왔지만 자기 여자친구인가 그 뭡니까 이름이 D 씨인가 85년생 글로 돈이 들어갔잖아요. 그걸 저 다 보여주더라고. 그걸 들어왔다고(위 녹취록 제4쪽)‘, ’자기 죽을 때 지금 죽는다, 죽는다 해 가지고 친 매형한테 보증을 제가 해줬잖아요. 그거 누가 해줍니까 가족도 못해주는 걸(위 녹취록 제10쪽), ‘아, 제가 해드려야죠, 당연히. 제가 뭐 법적으로 책임져야 되지 피할 수 있습니까 당연히 해드려야죠. 책임 있는데(위 녹취록...