The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

On April 6, 2017, the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 5 million to the Defendant up to April 20, 2017 and lent it by means of deposit into the Defendant’s mother C’s account. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the above loan and damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

Then, I argue that ‘the matter' is.

According to the statements in Gap evidence No. 2, the above remittance is recognized, and there are evidence showing that it is consistent with the loan to the defendant, which includes the contents certification (Evidence No. 3) that the plaintiff notifies the defendant of the return of the loan, and a copy of the written statement and identification card (Evidence No. 4-1 and 2 of Evidence No. 4).

However, the evidence is difficult to believe in violation of the purport of the Investment Agreement (No. 1) signed by the Plaintiff on its own, and there is no other evidence to prove that the above remittance was a nominal loan.

Rather, according to the above investment agreement, the above remittance seems to be the investment name of the plaintiff to E (the defendant of representative director) corporation.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim should be dismissed due to the lack of reasonable grounds.

The judgment of the court of first instance is just and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.