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

The defendant, in accordance with the above agreement, must make a settlement of a promissory note issued on January 21, 2008 (bill number F, face value 70,000,000,000 won, and on March 28, 2008, hereinafter referred to as "C bill"), but requested the plaintiff to make a substitute settlement without making such settlement, he/she issued one copy of a promissory note (e-bill number G, face value 48,500,000 won, and on July 10, 2008, hereinafter referred to as "E bill") and promised to make a settlement of E-bill.

However, the defendant, on July 10, 2008, paid on behalf of the defendant the amount of KRW 40 million in order to relieve the plaintiff from the responsibility of the endorser due to the failure to pay E-bills.

Therefore, the defendant should pay the plaintiff the above KRW 40 million as the return of unjust enrichment in front of the plaintiff, and the preliminary return of the reimbursement for reimbursement.

2. Even upon examining all the evidence submitted, it is hard to find that C/L was offered as a financing bill between the parties (it is difficult to readily conclude that C/L was a financing bill solely on the circumstance that C/L was offered frequently between the parties at the time of establishment) or that the Defendant agreed to pay E/L by providing E/L to the Plaintiff.

Rather, according to the evidence No. 3 and No. 1 through No. 3, the plaintiff lent C Bill to the plaintiff, who is an operator of HBA or his/her direction, and I borrowed KRW 70 million from the defendant by offering the above C Bill as security and borrowing the above C Bill from the defendant. After doing so, I is only recognized that it allowed the plaintiff to pay C Bill by delivering E Bills and cash 20 million won to the plaintiff.