1. According to the Plaintiff’s expansion of the purport of the claim in the trial, the judgment of the first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant.

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that he was in partnership with C and lent KRW 26 million to the Defendant, who carried on the business of manufacturing sacrife machinery, as its business fund.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above loan 26 million won and damages for delay.

B. Although there is a fact that the defendant allowed the use of the defendant's account upon C's request, the defendant did not borrow money from the plaintiff.

In addition, the defendant is not in a partnership with C.

2. Determination

A. On October 7, 2013, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 1 million to the Defendant’s account. (2) On February 20, 2014, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 5 million to the Defendant’s account. On the same day, the Defendant remitted KRW 5 million to D who is in charge of the manufacture of the foreign currency machinery.

3) On April 19, 2014, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 10 million to the Private Machinery Account. 4) On April 25, 2014, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 10 million to the E’s account, the mother of C, to the Defendant’s account on the same day. E wired KRW 10 million to the Defendant’s account on the same day. The Defendant, on the same day, remitted KRW 10 million to the Defendant’s account.

5) At the time of the Plaintiff’s transfer of the said money, the Defendant was registered as an internal director of F Co., Ltd. F for the business of manufacturing foreign currency machinery, etc., and was a shareholder holding 50% of the said company’s shares. (6) On February 2014, the Defendant requested the said D to manufacture foreign currency machinery, and instructed the said D to pay for major matters related to the manufacture of the said machinery.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 3, 9, 10, 13 (including paper numbers), Eul's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to view that the defendant, together with C, borrowed funds necessary for the above business from the plaintiff while carrying on the business of manufacturing private machinery, so the defendant borrowed funds necessary for the above business from the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant's above loan amounting to KRW 26 million (= KRW 5 million per KRW 10 million) and the judgment of the court of first instance among them.