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

Around 2013, the Defendant: (a) established a Co., Ltd. and changed the representative director to D, the Defendant’s husband; (b) closed business around March 15, 2016; and (c) established a “E” and continued to conduct business after being transferred all of the transaction partners and equipment assets of the Co., Ltd.; and (d) therefore, “E” operated by the Defendant is the same as “E”.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 40,000,000 and damages for delay.

2. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 5, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 40,000 to the account held in the name of C on August 31, 2012, and C was established on May 15, 2008, and C was engaged in the farming, water, livestock, freezing, food processing, and manufacturing business, etc., and the Defendant was working as the representative director of the above company, and retired on June 1, 2013, and thereafter D was appointed as the representative director of the above company. The Defendant registered his/her business with the trade name “E” and recognized the fact that he/she engaged in the manufacturing business, etc. on March 15, 2016.

However, it is insufficient to recognize that C, which received the above money solely with the above facts and the statements in Gap evidence 2, 4, and 6, has either been punished to the extent that it is not only the defendant's personal enterprise behind the corporate personality, or the defendant has abused the corporate personality as the person behind the corporate personality, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

There is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff lent the above KRW 40,000 to the Defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.