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

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion in this case is based on the premise that the Plaintiff’s transfer of KRW 50 million to the Defendant between June 19, 2009 and June 23, 2009 constitutes a loan to the Defendant.

However, according to the evidence Nos. 2, 3-15 and 15-2 of the evidence Nos. 3, and 1 of the evidence Nos. 50 million won, the defendant, immediately after receiving the above KRW 50 million from the plaintiff, can be found to have returned to the plaintiff on June 23, 2009, which was immediately after receiving the above KRW 50 million from the plaintiff, and thereby, it is reasonable to view that the obligation and obligation of the defendant with respect to the loan of KRW 50 million, as alleged by the plaintiff, was resolved around that time.

[Examination of the Plaintiff’s contents in the preparatory document as of May 30, 2018 and evidence No. 3-14, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 50 million to the Defendant from June 19, 2009 to June 23, 2009, but immediately returned KRW 50 million from the Defendant on June 23, 2009, and paid KRW 50 million to D, a bereaved family member of the deceased on June 25, 2009, as part of the Defendant’s liability for compensation for damages in relation to the network’s industrial accident. As a result, the Plaintiff’s assertion is used for the purpose of using KRW 50 million as claimed by the Plaintiff in this case, without any need to examine the remainder.

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