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

A. On November 3, 2010, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 20 million with a single bank account of C in a single bank account.

B. On January 27, 2011, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 20 million into the national bank account designated by the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. When the Plaintiff’s assertion loans money, the Plaintiff wired KRW 20 million to C’s account on November 3, 2010 at the request of C and the Defendant to pay interest at 10% per annum, and lent KRW 10 million to C and the Defendant respectively.

In addition, on January 27, 201, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 20 million to the Defendant at the request of the Defendant that he will pay the interest of KRW 10% per annum if he/she lends KRW 20 million to the Defendant.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 30 million and interest.

B. From the beginning of 2010, the Plaintiff: (a) employed the Defendant, C, D, E (hereinafter “Defendant, C, E, and D”; and (b) promised adequate compensation under the condition that the Defendant, etc. assist the Plaintiff’s business by operating the illegal floating gift business; (c) received KRW 10 million transferred by the Plaintiff on November 3, 2010 as the operating fund of the floating futures business; and (d) received KRW 20 million transferred by the Plaintiff on January 27, 201 as the consideration that the Defendant assisted the Plaintiff’s business.

C. We examine whether the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 30 million to the Defendant. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff is deemed to have paid KRW 30 million to the Defendant, but it is not sufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff’s entries in the evidence Nos. 3 through 15 and No. 7 alone are loans, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Rather, in full view of the facts that there is no dispute between the parties to the above evidence, and the entries in the evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and 8 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff obtained office offices in the office of the Han-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ftel on January 17, 2010.