The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons why the citer of the judgment of the court of first instance states concerning this case are as follows, except that the defendant added the following judgments as to the matters alleged in the court of first instance and the trial of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff's summary of the plaintiff's assertion is a loan of KRW 130,000,000,000, and the defendant should return it.

B. Although there is no dispute as to the claim of KRW 100 million between the parties on May 28, 2013 and KRW 40 million on the 31.6 million on the same month, the Plaintiff’s receipt of the claim is a loan for consumption, and the Defendant asserts that the cause of receipt of the claim is a loan for consumption, and if the cause of receipt is disputed, the Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that it was received due to the loan for consumption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972). The Plaintiff did not submit evidence proving that the above KRW 100,000 was lent to the Defendant up to the trial. 2) The evidence No. 11 (N) states that the Defendant knows that it was aware that the Plaintiff borrowed money from the Plaintiff, but according to the record of the evidence No. 12 (N) evidence No. 12, the above confirmation of the fact is deemed to have been prepared and signed by the Plaintiff and it cannot be believed as it is.

(A) On March 14, 2013, the Defendant loaned KRW 200 million to M Co., Ltd. with the Plaintiff’s introduction, and received a monetary loan agreement, and thereafter thereafter, re-loan KRW 100 million to M on April 4, 2013, and deducted KRW 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won.