1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff transferred KRW 46,50,000 to the Defendant B’s account, as shown in the instant case (attached Table 1) as follows. The Plaintiff transferred KRW 46,50,000 to the Defendant B’s account under the name of her spouse, including the Plaintiff’s transfer to Defendant B’s account. The Plaintiff’s wife Nos. 192,00,000 on Nov. 19, 2009, KRW 20,000 on Feb. 1, 2010, KRW 60,000 on Feb. 5, 200, KRW 10,000 on Feb. 10, 200, KRW 60,000 on Feb. 10, 200 on the Plaintiff’s wife of KRW 40,000 on March 10, 200, KRW 10,000 on the Plaintiff’s wife of KRW 50,000 on May 5, 2010

C. The Plaintiff’s remittance to Defendant C’s account was transferred to KRW 20,293,120 by means of the account in the name of Defendant C, as shown in the following case (attached Table 2).

The Plaintiff’s wife D 200,000,000 won on February 6, 2009 20,29 KRW 20,293,120 on June 25, 2008 / 19,000 on June 25, 2008 / 20,000 / 20,000 / 120 / 20,000 / 120 / 20,000 grounds for recognition / 1,00 / 20,000 / 1,0

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. Plaintiff 1) The primary cause of the claim was to transfer the sum of KRW 46,50,00 to Defendant B, as indicated in the instant case (attached Table 1) and to pay KRW 20,706,880 for the termination cost of the seizure of the reading and viewing by Defendant B. In addition, the Plaintiff lent the sum of KRW 20,293,50 to Defendant C, the wife of Defendant B, like the entry in the instant case (attached Table 2). Accordingly, the Plaintiff, the obligee of the said money, the obligor, and the Defendant B, the obligor, the sum of KRW 67,206,50 (=46,50,000), KRW 20,706,880, and KRW 293,500, and the Defendant C, the sum of KRW 293,500, and the above amount.