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

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was supplied with money from the Defendant during the period from January 27, 2012 to November 26, 2014, and the Defendant paid advance payment and was supplied with money.

However, even though there still remains an advance payment of KRW 23,118,600, the Defendant’s transaction was terminated by suspending the supply of the said advance payment, and thus, the said advance payment of KRW 23,118,600 should be returned.

B. Defendant 1) The Plaintiff and the Plaintiff are Nonparty B, the father of the Defendant, and Nonparty B, the Defendant’s father. 2) Although the Plaintiff determined the Plaintiff as KRW 7,00 per 1kg per wholesale market price at the time of the Plaintiff’s transaction, the Plaintiff unilaterally asserts that KRW 23,118,660 per 1kg was remaining.

C. 1) According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, the defendant asserted that "C" had a claim equivalent to KRW 23,118,660 out of advance payment as a result of settlement on the premise that the plaintiff's father was 3,500 won per 1 km, but it is not sufficient to acknowledge that the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a contract for money supply transaction only with the plaintiff and the defendant. Rather, in full view of the whole purport of the arguments in the statement Nos. 4 and 6 of Eul evidence, the plaintiff merely appears to have entered into a contract for money supply transaction with his father, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff agreed to supply money to KRW 3,500 per 1 km, while it is insufficient to acknowledge it only with Gap evidence No. 2, and there is no other evidence to prove that the plaintiff agreed to supply money to KRW 3,500 per 1 km.

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