1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. From the passbook in the Plaintiff’s name to the passbook in the name of the Defendant, KRW 5,00,000 was transferred from November 3, 2014 to the passbook in the name of the Defendant; KRW 10,000,000 on November 12, 2014; KRW 10,000 on November 21, 2014; KRW 5,000,000 on January 14, 2015; and KRW 10,000,000 on January 19, 205 to the passbook in the name of the Plaintiff; and KRW 40,000 on November 26, 2014 to the passbook in the name of the Plaintiff.

B. On November 4, 2014, the Defendant remitted KRW 5,000,00 to the head of the Tong under the name of the Plaintiff’s husband D. On January 16, 2015, the Defendant remitted KRW 5,000,000 to the head of the Tong under the name of the Plaintiff, as well as KRW 30,00,000 on June 29, 2015 (the name of the recipient: C Co.), and KRW 10,000,000 on September 10, 2015, and KRW 3,00,000 on January 17, 2017, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1- 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiff, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, lent KRW 80,000 to the Defendant, and received reimbursement of KRW 53,000,000 from the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 27,00,000 won and damages for delay from January 20, 2015, which is the day following the last lending date.

B. Defendant 1 did not borrow money from the Plaintiff. However, the Plaintiff’s husband D and the Defendant, a corporate representative director, agreed to make an investment, and only the said corporate company received an investment amount of KRW 60,000,000 from D. 2) Moreover, C refunded the investment amount of KRW 33,00,000 to D, and paid the amount of KRW 2,00,000,000 on behalf of D. The Plaintiff paid KRW 40,000 to D, and paid the installment of KRW 90,000 per month for one year.

3. Comprehensively taking account of the Plaintiff’s husband’s written evidence No. 4 and the purport of the entire argument, it can be acknowledged that the Plaintiff’s husband D and the Defendant sent to the Defendant on May 31, 2018 the word “abstinance of money and abstinence in the middle” to the Defendant. In light of this, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff lent money to the Defendant solely on the written evidence No. 1-3.