Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the money received from the plaintiff is not a loan but a loan that is not a reason for receiving the money (attached Form 1 No. 1-4) or a money received under the pretext of vehicle lease (attached Form 1-8 million won among 15) or an investment, etc. for the defendant's credit business, and that it cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.

2. The plaintiff's assertion that there was no dispute between the parties to the judgment as to the fact that the money was received, but the loan was lent, if the defendant contestss against the defendant, the party bears the burden of proving the loan.

(See Supreme Court Decision 72Da221 delivered on December 12, 1972). In light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff did not have any disposal document such as a loan certificate indicating the nature of the money remitted to the Defendant; (b) the criminal case between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (No. 10454 delivered on the part of the Defendant, if the Plaintiff lent money belonging to the Defendant’s falsehood, the Plaintiff did not submit objective materials proving the fact of the loan; and (b) the case was not subject to a non-prosecution disposition on the grounds of such reasons, and the Plaintiff’s appeal and the application for adjudication were dismissed (No. 2, 6, and 7 evidence) after the Plaintiff’s submission of the evidence alone, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff’s payment was a loan to the Defendant; and (c) there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.