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

A. After Defendant B received KRW 80,000,000 from J as the deposit money for the lease on a deposit basis, Defendant B paid only KRW 12,50,000 among them.

J lends 67,50,000 won to Defendant B on behalf of the Plaintiff.

B. The J lent KRW 30,132,550 to Defendant C by means of remitting a sum of KRW 30,132,550 on behalf of the Plaintiff.

C. Defendant D and E were the Plaintiff’s head, her mother, and J lent KRW 100 million on behalf of the Plaintiff when purchasing a house in Osan, Defendant D and E, one’s parent.

Defendant F and G are married couple. From June 2008 to December 27, 2012, J lent a total of KRW 17,080,950 on behalf of the Plaintiff to Defendant F and G on behalf of the Plaintiff.

E. By October 15, 2012, J lent Defendant H a total of KRW 2,907,100 on behalf of the Plaintiff.

F. On August 13, 2010, J on behalf of the Plaintiff lent KRW 10 million to Defendant I.

2. Even though there is no dispute over the fact that the parties to the case are able to receive money between the parties to the case, the ground that the plaintiff received money is a loan for consumption, and the defendant is liable to prove that it was received due to the loan for consumption if it is asserted that it was received due to the loan for consumption.

(See Supreme Court Decision 72Da221 delivered on December 12, 1972). The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Plaintiff lent each amount to the Defendants through the J that represented the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. The plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.