1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. As to the instant case cited in the judgment of the court of first instance, the reasons for this court’s explanation are as follows, except for the following: (a) a claim for a loan which was used by either the plaintiff or a preliminary loan in the court of first instance is added after the seventh and fourth of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) a statement of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance

[Supplementary part] The fourth 15th of the judgment of the first instance court shall be subject to the first instance court by converting the "this court" into "the first instance court".

Part 2-4 of the judgment of the first instance court (the sixth upper part of the judgment) shall be deleted.

The 6th judgment of the first instance court shall be subject to the "this Court" in the 19th judgment.

In accordance with paragraph 20 of the 6th judgment of the first instance court, "the results of each order to submit financial transaction information" shall be added to "the results of the examination of the plaintiff in the first instance."

2. Additional decision (as to a claim for a loan added in the trial)

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) from March 31, 2012 to October 31, 2012, the Plaintiff lent KRW 320 million in total to the Deceased, and the details of the lending are as follows: (a) from October 15, 2010 to October 31, 2012, the Plaintiff leased KRW 30 million in lease deposit from I to J Apartment-dong 1302 (hereinafter “J Apartment-dong 1302”) in Jung-gu, Seoul and the said deposit was also borne by the Plaintiff.

However, on March 31, 2012, the Deceased borrowed money as he/she is urgently needed to pay money for business, and the Plaintiff returned KRW 30 million out of the above lease deposit from I on March 30, 2012, and remitted it to the Deceased on March 31, 2012. On October 31, 2012, the Deceased returned KRW 270 million from I out of the above deposit to the Deceased, and dried it to the Deceased.

B) In addition, on October 23, 2012, the Plaintiff, upon the request of the Deceased for the lending of the deceased, caused K to transfer KRW 20 million to the deceased’s account. 2) The Deceased, as seen above, 30 million from the Plaintiff.