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 asserts that between April 11, 2005 and January 23, 2007, at the request of the defendant, he remitted the amount equivalent to US$ 202,654.65 to the defendant. Among them, he asserts that the defendant paid US$ 130,993.14, the defendant claimed that he paid US$ 71,661 to the defendant, and that he paid US$ 80,00,000 to the defendant.

The defendant asserts that although the defendant received money from the plaintiff's side, it is nothing more than that of the plaintiff's deposit of the profit accrued from the defendant's inter-market C Casino business place (hereinafter "the business place of this case") in exchange for money, and it does not borrow the above money.

2. We examine the following circumstances: ① the Defendant operated the instant business establishment from 2005 to early 2007, the Plaintiff appears to have been in charge of part of the business establishment of the instant business establishment; ② the Plaintiff submitted the account book (Evidence A A) prepared by the Plaintiff as direct evidence of lending money to the Defendant; the said account book was unilaterally prepared by the Plaintiff; ③ the Plaintiff’s source of money remitted to the Defendant is unclear; ③ the Plaintiff received half of the share of the business establishment operated by the Defendant and D, which was in the partnership business relationship with the Defendant as of April 2005, the Plaintiff transferred a certain amount to the Defendant and operated the business with profits of the instant business establishment; and the Plaintiff transferred money to the Defendant to the Defendant by means of payment to the Defendant, and there was no evidence to acknowledge the part of the account book prepared by the Plaintiff as the Defendant’s credit card.