A. On July 5, 2005, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 500 million to the account of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “C”) (hereinafter “the instant money”), and received a return of KRW 390 million among them until around July 15, 2005.

B. On October 1, 2007, the Defendant transferred to the Plaintiff the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) worth KRW 150 million with respect to the Plaintiff’s immovable property E (the Defendant’s number) and the maximum debt amount.

The plaintiff applied for the auction of real estate based on the above right to collateral security, but failed to receive dividends.

【Fact-finding without dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1-4, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The Defendant loaned KRW 500 million to the Plaintiff, which requires a balance certificate for C’s real estate business.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff borrowed the instant KRW 500 million to the Defendant on July 6, 2005, and the Defendant paid KRW 390 million among them.

Since then, the defendant transferred the right to collateral security of this case to repay the remaining money, but the plaintiff did not receive dividends.

Therefore, since the instant money is a loan, the Defendant is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 10 million and delay damages from July 7, 2005, which is the day following the due date for payment.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant decided to invest KRW 500 million in each apartment execution project of the F Il-si in the official city, and first, they decided to invest KRW 100 million in each of the street funds used to cancel the altitude limit of the project site.

In the above process, the Defendant deposited KRW 500 million into the account in order to verify whether the Plaintiff actually contributed to the investment, and the Plaintiff remitted the instant money.

Since then, the Plaintiff made an investment of KRW 100 million, and the Defendant’s investment of KRW 90 million, respectively, with the funds of KRW 100 million, and the Defendant returned KRW 390 million out of the instant money to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the instant money.