1. The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's claim expanded by this court are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. Quotation of the first instance judgment

A. The reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, except for the addition of the following "(b)" and "2. Additional determination" as to the claims extended by this court and the conjunctive claims newly added by the plaintiff, and therefore, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, it is acceptable to accept the same as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article

B. The part 1) The second part of the judgment of the court of first instance added "15 million won on December 31, 2007, 50 million won," and "2.5 million won on May 2, 2008, 2008." The second part of the judgment of the court of first instance is "16 million won" to "175 million won."

3. The last sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance is "A 1 to 4, 7, 14, 'A 1 to 4, 7, and 14'.

(3) On May 2, 2008, the Plaintiff shall transfer KRW 15 million to a deposit account in the name of the Defendant on May 2, 2008.

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that, by expanding the purport of the claim in this court, the amount loaned to the Defendant is not KRW 160 million, but KRW 175 million, and thus, the amount paid to the Defendant as of May 2, 2008 should be additionally refunded.

However, as in addition to all the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, it is insufficient to recognize that the above KRW 15 million was a loan to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, it is not reasonable that the plaintiff extended the claim in this court.

B. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that, in addition to the conjunctive cause of claim in this court, the Plaintiff paid KRW 175 million to the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant money”) to the Defendant for the construction of the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Seongbuk Complex Construction Project (hereinafter “instant project”), the Defendant is obligated to return the instant project to the Plaintiff upon the completion of the instant project.

Domins, Gap evidence 2-.