1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On October 31, 2005, the plaintiff's assertion E invested KRW 150 million to the defendant upon the plaintiff's introduction. Regarding this, the defendant agreed to return KRW 180 million to E up to February 10, 2006, and the plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the defendant's obligation to E.

After that, the defendant returned only KRW 150 million out of the above agreed amount to E, and the plaintiff, a joint guarantor, paid KRW 30 million to E on March 20, 2014.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above KRW 30 million and delay damages.

2. According to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1-1 to 4, it is recognized that Eul transferred the above KRW 150 million to the account in the defendant's personal name on October 31, 2005, and the defendant's personal seal is affixed on the performance note that Eul should transfer the above KRW 180 million to the account in the defendant's personal name, and return the above KRW 180 million to E, and that the defendant's personal name was remitted from the account in the defendant's personal name and the F's personal name to KRW 150 million on February 17, 2006.

However, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statements No. 3, No. 1, No. 6-1, and No. 6-2, G Co., Ltd., the representative director of which is the Defendant, may recognize the fact that the Defendant, at around November 2005, was invested KRW 150 million from E in order to raise land purchase funds during the process of receiving a request for land purchase services from the SKK Workplace Housing Association (regional housing association), and the performance letter prepared and issued by the Defendant, stating that E’s investment funds are funds for the purchase of the above project site, and that it is stated “G representative director B” in each letter.

As above, although the investment money was transferred to the account in the name of the defendant, it was returned from the defendant's personal name and the passbook in the name of the defendant and the seal affixed to the defendant's personal name on the letter of performance.

Even if the investment amount itself is not a business of the defendant, but a business of G Co., Ltd., and is also a letter of performance.