2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff is a company established on April 21, 2009 for the purpose of agricultural and fishery products distribution business, trade business, etc., and the Defendant has served as the head of the Plaintiff’s business team from May 18, 2009 to March 29, 2017.

B. From February 27, 2015 to January 29, 2016, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 500,000 per month to the Defendant, and from February 29, 2016, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 200,000 per month to the Defendant by February 28, 2017, adding the Defendant’s monthly wage increase to KRW 200,000.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. From February 27, 2015 to 2016, the Plaintiff, as the cause of the claim, must live monthly income by the Defendant.

2. The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 12.5 million per month (= KRW 500,000 per month x 25 months) and damages for delay, on the ground that the Defendant lent KRW 500,000 to the Defendant by the 29th day.

3. 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 the loan, the party bears the burden of proof as to the loan.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the Defendant was examined as to the instant case, as seen earlier, from February 27, 2015 to 2016

2. It is recognized that the Plaintiff received KRW 12.5 million from the Plaintiff until February 29 (i.e., KRW 500,000 per month (x 25 months; hereinafter “the instant money”). Meanwhile, the following circumstances acknowledged by the overall purport of each of the evidence, Gap evidence, evidence No. 5, 7, 8, and 10, and Eul evidence No. 3, i.e., the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not have a document on disposition, such as a loan certificate, related to the said money; ② there was no fact that the Defendant paid interest, etc. on a regular basis to the Plaintiff; ③ there was no fact that the Plaintiff urged the Defendant to pay the money; ③ the Plaintiff transferred the money to the Defendant from February 29, 2016 to February 28, 2017, whichever is KRW 700,000,000,000,000 to the Defendant.