1. The part against the plaintiff falling under the following order of payment among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked:

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 26, 2014, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 1 million to each Defendant’s single bank passbook, and KRW 1 million on June 27, 2014, to each Defendant’s single bank passbook. On July 11, 2014, the Plaintiff wired KRW 200,000 to the passbook in the name of the agricultural company Asian Pac (hereinafter “non-party company”).

B. The defendant is the above A.

Around June 2014, 200,000 won remitted from the Plaintiff, D shall be paid KRW 1.5 million to D by means of remitting to the passbook in the name of E, a parent of D, and the remaining KRW 500,000 has been remitted to F.

C. On July 19, 2014, the Defendant received KRW 500,00 from F, and wired the money to the Plaintiff’s passbook on the same day. Around July 2014, the Defendant received the certificate of borrowing KRW 2.5 million from D, and the obligee of the certificate of borrowing is indicated as the Defendant.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6, 8 (including the case of additional number), Eul's statement and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 2 million to the Defendant, on June 2014, at the Defendant’s request, who was affiliated with the non-party company that was a real estate development company, on two occasions. Around July 2014, the Plaintiff received notice of dismissal from the non-party company because it did not have any record of performance and received notice of dismissal from the non-party company, and the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 4 million to the Defendant by receiving a request from the non-party company for payment of deposits to the company.

B. The defendant's assertion introduced that the plaintiff lent money to D upon the request of D, and that the plaintiff lent 1.5 million won to D and used the defendant's account while lending 1.5 million won to D, not the defendant lending to F, and the amount of KRW 500,000 that the defendant lent to F was already repaid to the plaintiff, and the amount deposited by the plaintiff to the non-party company is irrelevant to the defendant.

3. Determination

A. First, as seen earlier, with respect to KRW 2 million deposited in the Defendant’s passbook, the Plaintiff around June 2014 to the Defendant.