1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant, upon the plaintiff's complaint, formed a loan certificate (Evidence A 1) stating that the defendant will borrow KRW 10 million from the plaintiff on November 30, 2015, on condition that the plaintiff withdraws the complaint, while being investigated by deceiving the plaintiff by deceiving the plaintiff that the defendant would be appointed as teaching staff of the plaintiff's children, and that the defendant will pay the plaintiff the above KRW 10 million by the due date. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the above KRW 10 million and its delay damages.

2. The circumstances that are acknowledged by adding the overall purport of pleadings to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 1, 8, 9, and 13, namely, the following circumstances: ① the above loan certificate does not state the condition of withdrawal of a complaint; ② the date of preparation of the loan certificate is March 31, 2015; ② the plaintiff’s submission of a written complaint to the police station in charge of the defendant’s criminal case was made on March 30, 2015; ③ the document (i.e., the loan certificate) stating the receipt of money on the condition of withdrawal of a complaint was prepared after the submission of the written withdrawal of the written withdrawal of the complaint; ③ the lawsuit claiming a loan against the plaintiff separately raised by the defendant (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016Da256777, March 30, 2015). The Plaintiff’s submission of the written withdrawal of the written withdrawal of the loan to the plaintiff was insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s withdrawal of the written withdrawal of the loan without the evidence.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair as it is concluded differently.