1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Transfer from the Plaintiff’s account under the Plaintiff’s name of 10,00,000 won on November 10, 201 to the Plaintiff’s account under the Plaintiff’s name of 10,000 won on November 10, 201, to the Plaintiff’s account under the Plaintiff’s name of 10,000,000 won on November 10, 201, to the Plaintiff’s account under the Plaintiff’s name of 10,000 won on November 10, 201, 10,000 won on November 10, 200, 201 to the Plaintiff’s account under the Plaintiff’s name of 10,000 won on November 10, 201, 201 to the Plaintiff’s account under the Plaintiff’s name of 0,010,000 won on November 10, 200, 2010 to the Plaintiff’s account under the Plaintiff’s name of 10.

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant are pro rata, and at the time of the Plaintiff’s transfer of money, the Defendant served as the chief at C’s “D” operated by C.

B. From November 9, 201 to December 5, 2011, the Plaintiff remitted total of KRW 170,000,000 to the Defendant over 13 occasions as shown in the following table.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff alleged that he lent the above KRW 170,00,000 to the defendant, the defendant asserted that the plaintiff lent the above money to C, not the defendant, and because the defendant had connected the plaintiff and C while working for the lending business operated by C, the defendant merely received money from the plaintiff and delivered the money to C in the middle.

3. Determination

A. On November 9, 201, the Plaintiff: (a) transferred KRW 5,000,000 to the Defendant on November 9, 2011; (b) received a certificate of cash custody of KRW 5,000,000, from the Defendant, to the Defendant as a custodian; and (c) thereafter, is separate.