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

A. According to Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff transferred 3 million won to the defendant's account on March 6, 2009 (hereinafter "the money of this case") according to the fact that the plaintiff remitted 3 million won to the defendant's account.

B. 1) The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff lent the instant money to the Defendant. 2) The Plaintiff is liable to assert and prove not only the fact that the money was remitted, but also that it was a loan under a monetary loan contract. Such principle of burden of proof does not change even if the other party to whom the money was received was not clearly asserted or did not prove that the other party did not use the said money.

According to the purport of the evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 10 and the entire pleadings, it is recognized that the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant had disappearedd from the time when the defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff seeking return of unjust enrichment (Seoul Southern District Court 201Gahap550, hereinafter “the Seoul Southern District Court 201Gahap550”), and thereafter the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant et al. on January 10, 201.

In light of the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, the time and developments leading up to the plaintiff's filing of the lawsuit of this case, and the fact that the money of this case is relatively small amount of money, it is difficult to readily conclude that the money of this case was transferred from the plaintiff to the defendant's account. In addition, the statement of the evidence No. 2 is merely a confirmation letter that the plaintiff's wife lent 3 million won from the plaintiff to the defendant.