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. Upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) KRW 3,00,00 on September 24, 2014; (b) KRW 10,00 on November 23, 2014; and (c) KRW 150,00 on December 15, 2014; (b) KRW 10,00 on December 15, 2014; (c) KRW 0,00 on January 10, 2015; and (d) KRW 0,00 on June 180, 200, KRW 00 on January 31, 2015; and (d) KRW 0,00 on May 20, 201; and KRW 40,000 on February 26, 2015; and (e) KRW 10,000 on March 210, 2015; and (e) KRW 10,05.25.15.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return the above loans to the plaintiff KRW 6,000,000.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff lent money between the parties to the judgment, even if there was no dispute as to the fact that the money was given and received, has the burden of proof as to the fact of the lending.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2014Da26187 Decided July 10, 2014, etc.). According to the evidence No. 1, the fact that the Plaintiff remitted KRW 5,500,000 to the Defendant from September 24, 2014 to February 2, 2016 is recognized.

However, in light of the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, together with the Chinese tour around October 2014, and the amount of remitted money, etc., it is insufficient to recognize that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone lent KRW 6,00,000 including the money remitted as above to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit.

The judgment of the first instance court is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.