1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant on May 27, 2013, and KRW 10,000,000 on July 25, 2013.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the loan amounting to KRW 20,000,000 and the delay damages.

B. Although there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment or according to the Gap evidence No. 2, the plaintiff transferred the sum of KRW 10,000,000 to the defendant's defendant's account on May 27, 2013, and KRW 20,000,000 to the defendant's defendant's child C account on July 25, 2013, it is recognized that the plaintiff transferred the above KRW 20,00,000 to the defendant's child account on July 25, 2013, it is insufficient to recognize the above KRW 20,000 to the defendant's testimony by the witness of the first instance trial and whether the plaintiff lent the above KRW 20,00,00 to the defendant.

2. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that he remitted the above KRW 20,000 to the Defendant is a de facto marital couple, on the condition that the Defendant, as a de facto marital couple, takes care of the Plaintiff’s family with the Plaintiff and takes care of the Plaintiff’s children with mental problems, etc. The Defendant did not perform his duty of support by leaving without permission only five months after the Defendant started living together.

Therefore, since the plaintiff cancelled the above gift contract with the delivery of the statement of grounds of appeal in this case, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 20 million won and delay damages.

B. The judgment whether the Defendant, as a de facto marital couple, transferred the above KRW 20,00,00 to the Defendant on the condition of supporting the Plaintiff’s children with mental problems as a result of fostering the Plaintiff’s family together with the Plaintiff as a de facto marital couple, there is no evidence to acknowledge it. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit without further examining.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance which dismissed the plaintiff's primary claim shall be concluded.