1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 19, 2007, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the Plaintiff on June 11, 2007 with respect to the D Apartment No. 103-dong 304 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. From October 2007, E, the Plaintiff’s birth, was living together with the Defendant from around October 2007, and around 201, the instant apartment was owned by the Defendant, and the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff, and entrusted the Defendant with the sale of the instant apartment, and the purchase price was also received from the Defendant’s account.

C. On May 6, 2011, the Defendant sold the instant apartment to F in KRW 82,00,000,000, and the sales contract entered itself as the Plaintiff’s agent, and received the payment of the purchase price as its passbook.

The Defendant used 27,00,000 won out of the sales price of 82,00,000 won as above to repay the secured debt of the right to collateral security established on the apartment of this case, and paid 500,000 won as real estate brokerage commission, and used the remaining money as the rental deposit and household purchase price of the apartment of this case.

E. On March 2012, E was paid KRW 13,00,000 to the Defendant on the ground that he/she had occupied the above G apartment and continued living together with the Defendant. On March 2012, 201, E requested that the Defendant support the game room business fund and received KRW 13,00,000 from the Defendant. Of them, KRW 3,00,000 was returned to the Defendant.

E was living with the defendant until July 2012, and paid living expenses to the defendant not later than three months prior to the completion of living together.

F. The Plaintiff filed a criminal charge of embezzlement around November 2013. However, on May 2, 2014, the Defendant was subject to the Incheon District Prosecutor’s Office’s Office’s decision not to prosecute the Defendant under suspicion (defluence of evidence) by Ordinance No. 85594 (defluence of evidence).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to the cause of the claim