1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's primary claim is dismissed.

3. The Defendant’s KRW 10,000,000 shall apply to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 14, 2016, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 10,000,000 to an account under the name of the Defendant (representative director C) (hereinafter “the instant money”).

B. After that, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant’s representative internal director C to return the instant money several times, but the following conversations were divided in the course of telephone conversations with C on August 31, 2016.

It is necessary to give more money to the plaintiff at any time accurately.

(C) If the defendant accurately speaks with the defendant, the inside director C of the defendant representative.

(2) If the purchase and sale within the territory of the Republic of Korea is made, the trading within the territory of the Republic of Korea is made in September 1, 201. (hereinafter the same shall apply). (2) If the trading within the territory of the Republic of Korea is made, the order of September 2, 201 is held in September 2, 201, the order of September 2, 201; (30) if the trading within the territory of the Republic of Korea was made by September 2, 201, the amount of interest within the territory of the Republic of Korea until September 2, 201; (4) if the trading within the territory of the Republic of Korea was made by September 2, 201, the amount of interest within the territory of the Republic of Korea to the extent that the trading within the territory of the Republic of Korea was made by September 2, 201; and (3) there was no basis for 30th of October 30, 201, and there was no dispute over the interests of the Republic of Korea.

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) In the first place, the Plaintiff lent the instant money to the Defendant on July 14, 2016, and the Defendant is obligated to repay the instant money (i.e., loans) to the Plaintiff. 2) In the second place, even if the Plaintiff invested not in the instant money but in the Defendant, the Defendant would return the instant money (i.e., investments) to the Plaintiff by September 30, 2016, even if the Plaintiff invested not in the instant money to the Defendant.

[Attachment].]