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. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff leased KRW 2 million to the Defendant on January 20, 2015, and KRW 3 million on January 23, 2015 at an annual interest rate of KRW 25% per annum, and on April 20, 2015, the due date for repayment was set and lent. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of the loan and the delay damages.

2. In addition to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the plaintiff remitted the amount of KRW 2850,000 to the Busan Bank account in the name of the defendant, and KRW 1970,000 on January 23, 2015, respectively, to the Busan Bank account in the name of the defendant.

However, on the other hand, in light of the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to the statement in Eul evidence No. 1 and part of witness C of the party trial, it is insufficient to acknowledge the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff lent KRW 2 million to the defendant on January 20, 2015, and KRW 3 million on January 23, 2015, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

① The Defendant did not borrow money from the Plaintiff, and only lent a passbook under the name of the Defendant to C, and C used money from the Plaintiff using a passbook under the name of the Defendant.

In addition to January 20, 2015 and January 23, 2015, the Plaintiff wired money to the Busan Bank in the name of the Defendant to several occasions. The money transferred by the Plaintiff was transferred or withdrawn through a debit card most immediately after the deposit.

However, since C appeared as a witness at the trial of the party and stated that C had withdrawn and used the above debit card, it is reasonable to deem C was the actual user of the above passbook, which conforms to the above argument of the defendant.

② The Plaintiff asserted that he first lent money to the Defendant on the date of the lease, but did not receive a loan certificate or cash custody certificate from the Defendant, and did not receive any security.

(3)