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. Summary of the parties' assertion

A. On October 25, 2017, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s claim, upon the Defendant’s request, lent the above money to the Defendant by means of remitting KRW 7 million to the deposit account in the name of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) registered as the representative director. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 7 million and damages for delay.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Plaintiff and the Defendant jointly established and operated the non-party company under the name of the Defendant, and the KRW 7 million asserted by the Plaintiff was transferred to the Plaintiff as the operating expenses of the said company as the Dong company, not to lend the Defendant.

2. In light of the following circumstances, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff lent the instant money to the Defendant solely based on the circumstances alleged by the Plaintiff and the evidence presented by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

(1) There is no objective evidence that the Plaintiff leased the instant money to the Defendant, and there is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to repay the instant money prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit.

around July 2017, the Plaintiff remitted the instant money to the deposit account in the name of the non-party company.

Although the defendant was the representative director of the non-party company at the time, the non-party company and the defendant company have a separate legal personality, it is difficult to recognize the money deposited in the above account as the claim against the non-party company.

[Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant requested that it be deposited into the bank account in the name of Nonparty Company, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it]. Comprehensively considering the following circumstances known by the evidence set out earlier, the Plaintiff’s assertion that it was deposited into the bank account in the name of Nonparty Company.