1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On March 2017, the Plaintiff filed a claim for vehicle usage fees and expressway tolls on an expressway with the Defendant, who owns the Plaintiff, lent the body straw-man vehicle in KRW 1,00,000 per month to the Defendant and operated it for about four months, and the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff a total of KRW 4,00,000,000 for four months.

In addition, since the defendant paid all of the plaintiff the tolls 470,880 won on the expressway imposed by the defendant while driving the above vehicle, the defendant is obligated to refund the above tolls amount to the plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff filed a loan to the Defendant around July 25, 2017, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to the Defendant the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 4.5 million that the Plaintiff borrowed from the previous Defendant. However, the remainder of KRW 5.5 million is the money that the Plaintiff lent to the Plaintiff on the condition that the Defendant would purchase softens and the remaining money used by the Plaintiff.

However, the Defendant did not give the Plaintiff a letter of apology with the said money, and did not return the money.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the above 5.5 million won with the loan.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which can be seen by comprehensively taking into account the respective entries and arguments in subparagraphs 1 through 7 and 11 of Article 1 and the overall purport of the argument, namely, (i) the Plaintiff and the Defendant sent the relevant vehicle under the premise of marriage from early 2017; (ii) the Defendant entered into a lease contract for the NAS vehicle in his/her own name on September 2015 and operated the said vehicle without delay in rent for about 17 months; (iii) under the above circumstances, it is difficult to understand that the Defendant, while paying the Plaintiff the rent equivalent to KRW 1 million per month, would have decided to operate the said vehicle together with the Plaintiff; and (iv) the Defendant spent a large amount of money in replacement, various maintenance, etc. while driving the vehicle.