1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is subject to Paragraph (1).

1. Basic facts

A. (1) On January 2015, the Plaintiff is the building located in Gangnam-si C, the Plaintiff owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant building”).

A) A lease deposit was leased KRW 35 million (i.e., the remainder of KRW 16 million) and the lease term of KRW 35 million. (ii) From the Defendant’s account to the Plaintiff’s account under the name of the Plaintiff, KRW 6 million was transferred from January 9, 2015, KRW 4 million on the 10 million of the same month, and KRW 6 million on the 13.6 million of the same month.

3) The Defendant received a loan of the deposit from the Plaintiff and transferred the loan amount of KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff’s account in the name of the remainder of the deposit for the lease. B. The Defendant requested a loan of KRW 10 million out of KRW 20 million in the name of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant loan”) under the name of the Plaintiff, and on January 30, 2015, transferred from the Plaintiff’s account to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant loan”).

Plaintiff

On January 30, 2015, KRW 11 million was transferred from the account under the name of the defendant to the account under the name of the defendant. Among them, there is no dispute between the parties that the loan is the amount of KRW 10 million and the remainder of KRW 1 million was refunded.

C. From March 2, 2015 to June 3, 2017, the amount of KRW 200,000 was transferred from the Defendant’s account to the Plaintiff’s account in the name of the Plaintiff each month, via a total of 28 occasions.

(hereinafter) Of the details of the 28-time transfer of the money that has been transferred on a monthly basis as above, KRW 200,000,000 transferred from the Defendant’s wife E account to the Plaintiff’s account on February 1, 2016.

1) Meanwhile, on June 2017, the Plaintiff transferred its ownership to D after selling the instant building to D. (2) As above, from July 1, 2017, after the ownership of the instant building was transferred to D, the Plaintiff did not transfer KRW 200,000,000, which was transferred from the Defendant’s account to the Plaintiff’s account in the name of the Plaintiff from July 1, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and arguments.