1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Plaintiff’s assertion

The Plaintiff filed a loan claim with a total of KRW 40,00,000 on four occasions from September 6, 201 to October 19, 2011. Among them, the Plaintiff paid KRW 20,000,000 in total, including KRW 10,000,000 on October 13, 201, and KRW 14,14,100 on December 14, 201, and thus, the Defendant ought to pay to the Plaintiff the unpaid balance of KRW 20,00,000.

The Plaintiff filed a claim for reimbursement of the amount of KRW 3,500,000 on May 26, 201, when the Defendant requested the payment of the purchase price for the company in possession, and transferred the amount of KRW 3,500,000 to the account under C’s name on May 26, 201. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay

The Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 20 million and KRW 10,000,000 on September 30, 2009, when the Defendant lent the purchase fund for the compact, around September 2009, the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 20,000 and KRW 10,000,000, which was borrowed after the completion of drilling. However, the Defendant thereafter did not pay KRW 10,000,000,00 in the purchase fund for the compact. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 10,000 to the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff filed a claim for damages by requesting the public officials of the military office who are well aware of it so that the plaintiff can obtain a building permit on the land he purchased through the introduction of the defendant, and delivered ten merchandise coupons of 100,000 won to the defendant, but the defendant did not deliver it to the public official in charge and consumed it at will, therefore, he is liable to compensate for damages equivalent to

Judgment

Even if there is no dispute as to the fact that the parties to the judgment on the loan claim provided money and received money, the plaintiff's assertion that the loan was lent has the burden of proof against the plaintiff who asserts that the loan was lent.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972; 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). According to the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, the fact that money has been continuously recorded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant through an account is difficult.