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. (1) Around December 10, 2012, the Defendant prepared and delivered a receipt (Evidence 1-1 of the Evidence A) to the Plaintiff, stating that “one hundred thousand won per day: one million won per day, and the above amount shall be received in a fixed manner.”

(2) Thereafter, the Defendant prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff a receipt (Evidence A No. 1-2) stating that “3.5 million won, C12 months,” and “the receipt” (Evidence A-1-2).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant did not pay wages to his wife because of the non-party company's non-party company's failure to receive the construction cost while entering into a subcontract for the steel construction work of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Building Construction Industry (hereinafter referred to as "non-party company"). The plaintiff lent 1.5 million won to the defendant around October 10, 2012, and 3.5 million won to the defendant among December 12, 2012, and the defendant received all the construction cost from the non-party company, so the defendant is obligated to pay 5 million won and delay damages to the plaintiff upon the return of the loan.

B. On November 2012, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for wooden and steel works from the Non-Party Company to the Non-Party Company for the construction of the Gangnam-gu Seoul building C, and the Defendant, from November 2012 to December 2012, 2012, performed the said construction works during the subcontracted construction works from the Non-Party Company. However, from January 2013, the Plaintiff directly subcontracted construction works from the Non-Party Company and completed construction works.

The Defendant’s receipt issued to the Plaintiff is merely that the Defendant received the payment for the completed portion of the steel-frame work from the Plaintiff on November 2012 and December 2012, and the Defendant did not borrow money from the Plaintiff.

3. In the receipt that the Defendant written to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff entered “wages” (Evidence A 1-1-1-2) and “explosive” (Evidence A-1-2) in the receipt that the Defendant written to the Plaintiff, and even if in itself, the text thereof is written to the Defendant.