1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around May 14, 2010, the Plaintiff’s father C paid the Plaintiff KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff, only around 17 years thereafter.

B. On May 18, 2010, the Plaintiff’s East D sent letters to the Plaintiff to criticize C’s payments of money over three times on three occasions, namely, 18:45, 19:14, 21:58.

C. On May 19, 2010, the Plaintiff found a 10 million won check at a national bank (hereinafter “the instant check”), and sought to find it at the Defendant’s home, which is a private village, with her husband, and issued the instant check to the Defendant.

The defendant issued the check of this case to E, one's own life, and the above 10 million won deposited into the account in his name.

E. On October 13, 2011, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content to the effect that the instant check will be entrusted to the Defendant, and thus, the Plaintiff sent a certificate of content to return KRW 10 million by October 20, 201.

[Ground for recognition - Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 5, Eul evidence 8-1, Eul evidence 3-1 and 2, the result of the verification by the court of the trial, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion entered into a deposit contract with the Defendant on May 19, 2010. Since the Plaintiff notified the termination of the deposit contract on October 13, 201, and return it to October 20, 201, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 10 million as the return upon termination of the deposit contract and the delay damages therefrom from October 21, 201.

B. Therefore, the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the result of verification by the court of the trial on the issue of whether a deposit contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and on the entry of Gap evidence No. 5, are as follows: at the time of the Plaintiff’s delivery to the Defendant of the instant check, the Plaintiff puts the instant check to the Defendant among those who were subject to criticism by other family members, including East D, etc. since her father received KRW 10 million from his father C.