The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Plaintiff is liable to pay KRW 9,00,000 and damages for delay to the Plaintiff, since the Plaintiff transferred the total amount of KRW 9,000,000 on May 23, 2015, and KRW 6,000,000 on June 11, 2015 to the account in the name of C, his/her father, and that the Defendant is liable to pay KRW 9,00,000 and damages for delay.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserted that, among the E-Road Construction Works subcontracted by D Co., Ltd., the Plaintiff re-subcontracted to the Defendant, the reinforced concrete construction work (hereinafter “the instant construction work”). However, the Plaintiff’s funds transferred to the Defendant’s account under the name of his/her father was paid as the price for the materials of the instant construction work and the cost for the installation of fry houses

2. Determination

A. In a case where a transfer is made to transfer money to another person’s deposit account, etc., such transfer may be made based on various legal causes, such as a loan for consumption, a donation, and a repayment. Therefore, the mere fact that such transfer was made cannot be readily concluded that there was the intent of the parties to a loan for consumption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da30861, Jul. 26, 2012). The burden of proving that such transfer was in accord with the intent of the parties to the loan for consumption is asserted to the Plaintiff that such transfer was made based on a loan for consumption.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). B.

As to the instant case, comprehensively taking account of the description of No. 1 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff transferred the sum of KRW 9,000,000,000 on May 23, 2015 and KRW 6,000,000 on June 11, 2015 (hereinafter “the instant money”) to the account in the name of the Defendant’s father-child.

However, the following circumstances, i.e., the Plaintiff and the Defendant, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account each of the above facts of recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including branch numbers) and the overall purport of pleadings: