1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation of this case are as follows: (a) even if the plaintiff deposited the plaintiff's claimed money into the account under the name of the defendant, it cannot be ruled out that the cause of the deposit is not a monetary loan, but a loan of 75 million won in the form of investment, donation, or the plaintiff's debt repayment to the defendant, etc.; (b) it is difficult to clearly understand that the lending of 75 million won in total without the preparation of disposal documents, such as a monetary loan contract, or the due date for payment, interest, etc.; and (c) if the above money was lent to the defendant as alleged by the plaintiff, the plaintiff is in the status of the representative director at the time of the defendant's own transaction, and thus, it is necessary to adopt a resolution of the board of directors at the time of such juristic act. It is also necessary to establish that there was no evidence to acknowledge that there was a resolution of the board of directors on a monetary loan contract, and on the third and subsequent grounds for the plaintiff's argument at the court below as stated in the first and second judgment as follows.

In addition, even if the plaintiff did not conclude a monetary loan contract between the plaintiff and the defendant, the plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff has the right to claim the return of the claim amount in this case at the time of withdrawal as the representative director of the defendant's representative director when it is difficult to do so. However, the above claim amount refers to the claim that the corporation is obligated to pay to the representative director, and as such, the plaintiff has the right to claim the return of the claim amount in this case against the defendant.