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. The parties' assertion

A. Since Plaintiff 2 lent KRW 20 million to the Defendant on June 2, 2011, the Defendant is obligated to return it to the Plaintiff.

B. The above money of the defendant was received by C to pay part of its debt amounting to KRW 200 million against the defendant, not borrowed from the plaintiff.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 2, 2011, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 20 million with Defendant D’s account in the name of Defendant D.

B. The Plaintiff asserted that “the Defendant deceivings the Plaintiff without intention or ability to complete payment, and borrowed KRW 20 million to borrow the Defendant,” and filed a complaint against the Defendant on charges of fraud. On August 28, 2013, the former District Prosecutors’ Office issued a disposition of suspicion on the grounds that “The Defendant has a claim of KRW 200 million against C, which is necessary to return the said money,” and that “A talks with the Plaintiff to return the money to the Defendant, which the Plaintiff remitted KRW 20 million to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence proving the Defendant’s criminal fact.”

C. Between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, a disposal document, such as a loan certificate related to KRW 20 million, has not been prepared.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

3. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no dispute between the parties as to the fact that there was a receipt of money but the loan was lent is proved by the burden of proof on the Plaintiff who asserted that the loan was lent.

(Supreme Court Decision 2013Da73179 Decided September 15, 2015). B.

It is insufficient to recognize that KRW 20 million deposited by the Plaintiff was given as a loan, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

4. The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance which has different conclusions is unfair, so the defendant's appeal is accepted, and the plaintiff's claim is revoked and dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.