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.

1. The parties' assertion

A. On March 29, 2013, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion stated that “Around March 29, 2013, the Defendant would also create a right to collateral security for investment funds by paying the Plaintiff a monthly profit of KRW 250 million if the Plaintiff invested KRW 250 million.”

Accordingly, the plaintiff on March 29, 2013, 11,9270,000 won to the defendant for the same year.

4.2. 50 million won has been paid (transfer to the Defendant’s single bank account) and C has invested a total of KRW 250 million by requiring the Defendant to pay KRW 8073,000 to the Defendant (payment in cash).

After that, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to return the investment amount of KRW 250 million on several occasions, and the Defendant promised to return it on May 2013.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 250 million won and damages for delay in accordance with the agreement to return the investment amount.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion was that the Defendant solicited the Plaintiff to make an investment in the studio d’s business opening. The Defendant invested the money remitted from the Plaintiff to D.

However, it was not well operated due to the operation of studio harassment, and D was bound, and the studio harassment was closed and the investment money was all made.

The defendant did not agree to return the investment amount to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

2. Determination

A. In full view of whether the amount invested by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is 250 million won or not, and the purport of each of the statements and the entire arguments in subparagraphs 1 through 3 of Article 11 as to whether the amount invested by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is 250 million won, the Plaintiff’s 11,9270,000 won on March 29, 2013, and the same year

4.2.50 million won, etc. which is a sum of KRW 160,9270,000,000,000 (the defendant's remittance to the single bank account) may be recognized as having invested.

2) However, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff invested 8,0730,000 won to the Defendant in addition to the above amount is insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s testimony of the witness of the first instance trial and the statement of No. 6 and the testimony of the witness of the