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

On March 2013, the Plaintiff started living together with the Defendant on September 2013, 2013, with the Defendant’s residence D and 1st floor (hereinafter “instant house”).

On October 1, 2013, the Plaintiff issued a cashier’s checks of KRW 28,517,00,000 at face value to the Defendant, and the Defendant used the cashier’s checks of KRW 28,517,000 at face value to repay loans it had incurred to the Korea Saemaul Bank. The cashier’s checks of KRW 5,00,000 at face value were paid to the lessee of the upper floor of the instant house.

[Ground of recognition] A. 2, 3, 4 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), 3 and 4 evidence, 3 and 4 evidence, assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and claim that the plaintiff lent money equivalent to the face value of cashier's checks at the defendant's request, and the defendant asserts that he donated money on a de facto basis.

First of all, the Housing Lease Agreement (Evidence A) that the Plaintiff prepared with the authority delegated by the Defendant to clarify that the said money has to be returned is insufficient evidence to recognize that the Defendant, the nominal holder, delegated the right to prepare, and thus, cannot be admitted as evidence.

In addition, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by adding the whole purport of arguments to each of the aforementioned evidence and evidence Nos. 7, 5, 6, and 7, that are, the plaintiff and the defendant, who separated from his/her own spouse and married himself/herself, introduced each other to his/her children, starting with his/her school system, and arranging the other party's repayment cost without compensation. After that, the plaintiff and the defendant went to a foreign country, he/she did not claim and exercise the loan claim in addition to the repatriation cost of KRW 20,000,000.