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. Basic facts

A. On May 24, 2014, the Plaintiff remitted total of KRW 10 million to the Defendant, KRW 5 million on May 26, 2014, KRW 20 million on May 26, 2014, and KRW 5 million on May 27, 2014.

B. On June 21, 2014, the Defendant remitted total of KRW 1.9 million to the Plaintiff, including KRW 500,000,000,000 on July 1, 2014, KRW 300,000 on July 21, 2014, KRW 300,000 on July 28, 2014, and KRW 300,00 on August 4, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence No. 1 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence No. 1-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The above KRW 20 million transferred to the Plaintiff by the Plaintiff’s assertion is a loan to the Defendant. Since the above KRW 1.9 million that the Defendant remitted to the Plaintiff is a repayment for the above loan, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above KRW 20 million less the above KRW 1.9 million and the damages for delay.

B. Even if there is no dispute as to the fact that there is an amount of money between the parties to the judgment, the reason that the plaintiff received it is a loan for consumption, and the defendant is liable to prove that it was received due to a loan for consumption if it is disputed.

(See Supreme Court Decision 72Da221 delivered on December 12, 1972. The Plaintiff’s transfer of KRW 20 million to the Defendant is based on the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff’s transfer of KRW 20 million to the Defendant is a loan for consumption, and the Plaintiff’s partial entry of KRW 3 through 5, and KRW 10-2 and KRW 3, which correspond to the Plaintiff’s assertion, is the Plaintiff’s transfer of KRW 20 million, and either the Plaintiff’s transfer of KRW 3 through 10-2 and KRW 10, or the Plaintiff’s unilaterally made or made a statement. As such, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed for lack of merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, so the defendant's appeal is accepted and the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is revoked.