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 parties' assertion

A. As the Plaintiff alleged to be the Plaintiff, respectively, remitted to the Defendant KRW 296,445,00 on November 12, 201, and KRW 254,00,00 on June 3, 201, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 550,445,00 (= KRW 296,445,000) and delay damages therefrom.

B. The defendant's assertion that he received each of the above money from the plaintiff is not a loan but a loan.

① The remittance amount of KRW 296,445,00 as of November 12, 2010 is KRW 296,445,00,00 that the Plaintiff received from the Defendant and C as security deposit in the course of taking out a loan from the agricultural cooperative by a mother to the Defendant as security deposit. Upon the Plaintiff’s request, four persons, including the Plaintiff, the Defendant and the Defendant, and H and I, who jointly received KRW 254,00,000 as of June 3, 201, including the remittance amount of KRW 254,00,000,000, as well as KRW 704,04,000,000,000 G, J, 1,079, L, 182, and 30,000 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “D land”), which were jointly paid by the Plaintiff as the “land purchase deposit” and the “land purchase price” in the case of the Plaintiff.

2. Determination:

A. In a case where a transfer is made by transferring money to another person’s deposit account, etc., the remittance may be made based on various legal causes. Therefore, the fact that the money transferred by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is a loan under a monetary loan contract must be proved by the Plaintiff (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972). As the documents such as a contract or a loan certificate are not prepared between the parties, it is unclear whether the money transfer was made according to a lending contract or based on other causes.