1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The fact that the Plaintiff, on May 31, 201, remitted to the Defendant KRW 2,00,000, KRW 8,000,000 on June 11, 2010, KRW 1,000,000 on October 5, 2010, KRW 200,000 on October 2, 2010, KRW 1,500,000 on December 9, 201, KRW 1,000 on January 11, 201, KRW 50,000,00 on January 31, 201, KRW 30,00 on January 30, 201, KRW 300,00 on March 18, 201, KRW 100 on the aggregate of the parties’ arguments and KRW 1,000 on October 6, 206, 2013.

2. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff lent the above money to the defendant, and the defendant asserts that the plaintiff voluntarily donated the above money to the defendant during the process of the plaintiff's teaching.

The plaintiff delivered KRW 16,90,000 to the defendant as seen earlier, but the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the entries in Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the entire arguments, i.e., the period of lending the above money to the defendant has reached two years and eight months, which appears to have been between the plaintiff and the defendant, and even according to the plaintiff's assertion, it appears that there was no agreement on the payment period or interest at the time of the delivery of the above money. This appears to be somewhat unusual in general monetary loan contract, and it appears to be somewhat unusual in general monetary loan contract, and it appears that the plaintiff did not have received or urged the payment even some of the above money during the above period. According to the plaintiff's argument, the plaintiff lent KRW 10,00,000 to the defendant, and it is difficult for the plaintiff to understand that additional money was given several times for a long time under the circumstances where part of the above loan was not received from the defendant.