1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff operates the food machinery manufacturing business chain “C”, and the Defendant operated the food manufacturing business chain “D”. Around 2006, the Plaintiff became aware of the Plaintiff’s repair of the machinery of “D,” and around October 2010, the Plaintiff supplied the machinery to the “E Agricultural Association Corporation” (hereinafter “E”) and received KRW 48,620,000 for the price on October 18, 2010.

B. On October 19, 2010, the Plaintiff indicated the remitter as the Plaintiff through an account in the name of F that is a partner, and remitted the amount of KRW 10 million to the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant money”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s instant money is the money that the Defendant lent at the Defendant’s request.

B. The Defendant did not receive KRW 26,825,00 from the Defendant’s representative of the “E Agricultural Association Corporation” (hereinafter “E”) to G, who is the non-party corporation, and the amount of KRW 50 million was set by the budget to purchase the machinery, the Plaintiff introduced the Defendant to G as the supplier of the machinery. The Plaintiff, the Defendant, and G supplied the machinery based on the estimate plus KRW 13 million to the actual supply price to the non-party corporation, and returned the machinery to the Defendant as part of the Defendant’s claim. Accordingly, the Plaintiff returned KRW 13,00,000,000, which was added to the non-party corporation, to the part of the Defendant’s claim, and even if not, the amount of this case is not a loan granted in return for mediating the transaction of the goods with the non-party corporation as above.

3. Determination

A. Although there is no disposal document written on the instant money, it is difficult to view the instant money as a large amount to prepare a loan certificate, etc. even though there is account transfer details, and the Plaintiff traded with the Nonparty corporation on the part of the Defendant’s intermediary, and the instant money was traded with the Nonparty corporation.