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. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The Defendant is a person living together with C (one name D) and said that “the Plaintiff would have borrowed KRW 2.4 billion if the Plaintiff lent the said money,” and the Plaintiff is liable to pay the said money to the Defendant as a joint principal offender for fraud, even if the Plaintiff delivered the said money to C by deception on August 25, 2009, KRW 1,500,000 on September 2, 2009, KRW 1,500,000 on October 1, 2009, KRW 3,000,000 on October 13, 2009, and KRW 7,000,000 on a check. However, even if the Plaintiff delivered the said money to C by deception, the Defendant is liable for the said money as a joint principal offender for fraud.

B. The defendant did not borrow money from the plaintiff, and the money transferred by the plaintiff to the defendant is paid as the repayment of the loan from C, and there is no fact of receiving cashier's checks equivalent to seven million won in face value.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 2 of the evidence Nos. 1-2, each of the following facts are acknowledged: (a) from the bank account under the Plaintiff’s name to the bank account under the Defendant’s name on August 25, 2009; (b) KRW 1,640,000 on September 2, 2009; (c) KRW 1,500,000 on October 1, 2009; (d) KRW 3,000,000 on October 13, 2009; and (e) KRW 7,000,000 on October 13, 209; and (e) KRW 7,000,000 on a cashier’s check issued on October 13, 2010.

B. On the other hand, in light of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff or the facts of issuing the remittance details or cashier’s checks are insufficient to deem that a loan for consumption between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was concluded on the sole basis of the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff or the facts of issuing the cashier’s checks, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

1) The Plaintiff did not assert any specific argument regarding the agreement on the interest on the above loan or the time of return. 2) The Plaintiff or other persons who filed a complaint with the Plaintiff or C around that time.