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

A. From March 18, 2008 to August 8, 2008, the Plaintiff remitted total of KRW 119,940,000 (hereinafter “the instant money”) to the Defendant’s deposit account as follows:

B. In around 2008, the Defendant operated the automobile maintenance business center under the trade name C, and A.

The money transferred as described in the subsection was used as business funds.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 1-1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is not an investment but a loan.

The Defendant is obligated to repay the remaining loans of KRW 116,632,00 (=119,940,000-3,308,000) to the Plaintiff, which remains after deducting KRW 3,308,00 from the amount of the instant loan.

B. In order to file a claim for return of the loan, the burden of proof must be demonstrated: (i) the conclusion of the loan for consumption, (ii) the delivery of the subject amount, and (iii) the due date of return.

However, even if the other party fails to submit evidence despite the other party's assertion that it is funds for other purposes, other than the loan, or the evidence submitted is inconsistent, it is merely a denial of the loan's assertion. Accordingly, it cannot be deemed that it is a loan, and it should be proved that the party who asserts the loan still has lent the money.

The plaintiff remitted 119,940,000 won to the defendant, and the fact that the defendant received it and used it as business fund, etc. is as mentioned above, and the witness Eul evidence 2-2 and witness D's testimony and arguments are all made.