1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. On May 201, the Plaintiff was married with C without marriage, and the Defendant was the mother of the Plaintiff.

B. On May 4, 2011, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 10 million to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant money”), and the Defendant wired KRW 3 million to C on the same day.

On the other hand, at the time of transferring the instant money to the Defendant, the Plaintiff’s remittance balance was KRW 25,223,402, and the instant money was transferred to the Defendant upon receiving a marina loan.

C. After that, the Plaintiff entered into marriage with C on June 19, 2011.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-1, Eul evidence 1-4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that, on May 4, 201, the Defendant loaned the instant money to the Defendant on the ground that he/she would give up the Plaintiff a letter of intent to increase his/her own property, the Defendant is obligated to pay the said loan and the damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant asserts that the defendant only received the instant money from the plaintiff under the pretext of wedding expenses or wedding expenses related to the marriage ceremony of C and the plaintiff, and does not lend the instant money.

3. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff transferred the instant money to the Defendant’s account on May 4, 2011. However, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff would have made the Defendant use of the Plaintiff’s letter of intent to increase his/her property and borrowed the instant money at the purchase cost of the Plaintiff’s transfer account. However, under the circumstances where the remainder of the Plaintiff’s transfer account was 25 million won, the Plaintiff again lent the money to the Defendant by borrowing KRW 10 million from the head of the Maners passbook to the Defendant for the purpose of increasing his/her property, there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the distribution of profits after purchasing the interest or the return paper.