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 gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 6.25 million and the amount of subrogated payment, as stated below.

Loans: The Plaintiff lived with the Defendant from around 2007, and around that time, the Plaintiff received a request from the Defendant studying Russia to lend money through international telephone on November 12, 2009, and transferred KRW 300,000 to the Defendant’s friendship D’s account, and transferred KRW 4250,000 to the above D’s account until December 22, 2010 (specific details are transferred from the Plaintiff’s National Bank’s account to the above D’s account) and attached Table 1-1-2 (the details transferred from the Plaintiff’s Nonghyup Bank account to the above D’s account) and attached Table 1-2 (the same shall apply) through C).

2. 23. Each 1 million won lent KRW 2 million.

The Defendant borrowed, through C, a total of 8 million won from E, a female employee of the Plaintiff, on several occasions, and a total of 8 million won from the Plaintiff-friendly job offering F, respectively, and thereafter the Plaintiff subrogated for each of the above money for the Defendant.

2. According to the reasoning of the evidence Nos. 2 and 3, as shown in attached Table 1-1, KRW 2,50,000 was remitted from the national bank account in the Plaintiff’s name to the three bank account in the name of the Plaintiff, as shown in attached Table 1-1, and as shown in attached Table 1-2, a total of KRW 2,20,000 was remitted from the Plaintiff’s Nong Bank account in the Plaintiff’s name to the aforesaid D name. However, the facts recognized and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone leased KRW 6,250,00 to the Defendant by the Plaintiff

It is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant is a debtor of KRW 16 million against E and F, or that the plaintiff has subrogatedly repaid the above KRW 16 million on behalf of the defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the court of first instance shall be dismissed.