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. The plaintiff's assertion 10,70,000 won and 1,000,000 won and 1,00,000,000 won and 10,000,000 won and 8,00,000,000 won and 1,000,000,000 on August 31, 2013 and 10,000,000 won and 10,000,000,000 won and 3,00,000,000,000,000 won and 10,000,000,000 won and 10,000,000 won and 10,000,000 won and 10,000,000 won and 10,000,000 won and 10,00,000 won and 10,005,208.

In regard to this, the defendant asserts that the amount of this case was unilaterally remitted to the defendant who was between the plaintiff and the plaintiff at the time, and that the defendant had incurred a burden and returned a part of the amount to the plaintiff, but it did not have been borrowed or repaid.

2. Review of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 5, the plaintiff may remit 1,700,000 won to the defendant July 23, 2013, and 1,000,000 won, and 8,000,000 won on August 31, 2013, and 1,000,000 won on December 10, 2013, and 10,000,000 won on December 10, 200, 10,000 won on December 27, 2013, 00, 3,000,00 won on KRW 10,7,000, 7,000, 7,0000, 7,0000 won on January 7, 2014, 2005 and 10, 2005.

However, even if there is no dispute over the fact that the parties exchange money, while the plaintiff asserts the cause of receiving money as a loan for consumption, when the defendant asserts that it is a loan for consumption (see Supreme Court Decision 72Da221 delivered on December 12, 1972), the plaintiff bears the responsibility to prove that it is a loan for consumption (see Supreme Court Decision 72Da221 delivered on December 12, 197), and the statement in Gap Nos.