1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The appellate court citing the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is identical to the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case, and thus citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

However, the first instance court’s 4th 1 and 2th 1st 2nd 1st 1st 2st 2st 2st 2st 3th 3th 4th 3th 4th 2000 2th 2th 2000 per annum. The Plaintiff asserted that “The Plaintiff determined 1.6 billion won per annum, including the above 600 million won, at 20% interest per annum,” and that the Plaintiff loaned KRW 1.6 billion per annum from August 27, 2018 to the interest rate per 2th 2th 200 th 2th 20,000 20,000 from the time to December 24, 2014, the Plaintiff did not claim to the effect that “The Plaintiff added 1,600,000 won to the remainder of the principal of the loan and interest on convenience and added 20% interest rate from December 25, 2014.”

2. The plaintiff asserts that the appellate court also lent KRW 50 million to the defendant on May 18, 2006, and KRW 100 million on March 29, 2007.

However, along with the circumstances in the first instance court, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is difficult to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff asserts, considering the fact that the Plaintiff’s joint investment certificate (Evidence A No. 17-1) prepared on April 18, 2007, prepared by the Plaintiff and the Defendant, entered KRW 600,000,000,000 as the investment amount, and the Defendant entered the joint investment certificate (Evidence A No. 17-1) written on April 18, 2007.

The plaintiff's assertion on this part is not accepted.

3. Conclusion, the first instance judgment is justifiable.

The plaintiff's appeal is groundless and rejected.