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

A. The Plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of the business of installment financing used cars.

The Plaintiff Company entered into a business agreement with the Matz Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Matz Capital”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff Company carries out the affairs of credit inquiry of the applicant for installment financing, the collection of relevant documents, the signature, the confirmation of the contractor’s identity, the transfer of the contractor’s name, the establishment of mortgage, etc.

B. On March 23, 2017, the Defendant decided to purchase BW 640D used vehicles from “B”, which is a used car sales outlet, through the brokerage of BW 640D.

The defendant was allowed to visit the plaintiff company with the introduction of C in order to obtain a loan of 48 million won out of 82 million won for purchase.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff Company arranged to arrange installment financing transactions between the Defendant and the Defendant after making a credit inquiry against the Defendant, and prepared all documents necessary for installment financing transactions between the Defendant and C.

The normal procedure of installment financing brokerage is conducted in such a way that the Plaintiff transfers the loan to the Plaintiff, a broker, by means of re-transfering the loan to the customer of installment financing.

(The 7th date of pleading of the Plaintiff). However, on March 23, 2017, at the request of C, the Plaintiff transferred 48 million won to the account of C at the Bank around 19:05 on March 23, 2017 when the Plaintiff did not receive a loan from Mez capital, and C consumed it for personal purposes.

E. On March 24, 2017, the Defendant respondeded to the purport that “the Defendant received a confirmation phone on loan application, etc. from the employees of the Mez Capital,” and that “the Defendant did not receive a loan, but did not receive a loan, and did not accept a used car.”

On the other hand, the defendant received contact from C to prevent the sale of vehicles due to tax issues, etc.

In the end, the defendant was not paid a loan from the Matz Capital, and the above.