1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Basic Facts

Upon C’s request by the former representative director and the husband of the current representative director, the Plaintiff remitted the total amount of KRW 280 million to the bank account under the name of the Defendant, including KRW 150 million on April 6, 2015, KRW 120 million on April 22, 2015, KRW 30 million on July 29, 2015, and KRW 200 million on April 2, 2015, and C drafted and issued respectively a loan certificate to the Plaintiff on April 2, 2015, KRW 150 million on loan, KRW 10 million on June 2, 2015, KRW 100,000 on loan, KRW 100,000 on April 21, 2015, and KRW 20,000 on June 2, 2015.

(2) On June 17, 2015, the Plaintiff issued to C a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the terms and conditions that the Plaintiff leased underground floors of the Songpa-gu Seoul building from June 17, 2015 to June 17, 2015 (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”). The Plaintiff issued to C with the Plaintiff KRW 100 million (hereinafter “instant money”) and the Defendant granted the lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the terms and conditions that the Defendant leased underground floors of the building in Songpa-gu Seoul to the Plaintiff and D from June 15, 2015 to June 17, 2017.

[Based on recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, and Eul evidence Nos. 11, and Eul evidence Nos. 11, each testimony of the witness H and witness D of the court of first instance, part of the witness C of the court of first instance, the assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff's assertion of the parties to the judgment, the plaintiff extended the money of this case to the defendant upon the request of C who actually operates the defendant or received the power of representation from the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant should pay to the plaintiff the sum of the above loan amounts of KRW 380 million and delay damages.

A person who borrowed the instant money from the Plaintiff is not the Defendant, but the Defendant was trying to invest in the game business with D, H, and the Defendant merely lent the bank account in the name of the Defendant to C who was unable to use the bank account by seizure of credit card companies, etc.

In addition, the instant lease agreement was prepared by the Plaintiff to operate a singing room in the building owned by the Defendant, and thereafter, the Plaintiff intended to rent.