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

(C) The fact that there is no dispute)

2. Judgment on the issue

A. The plaintiff asserts that he/she has lent the money stipulated in paragraph (1) to the defendant, and the defendant asserts that he/she has donated the above money to the plaintiff as the defendant's mother.

B. According to the evidence evidence No. 5 and evidence No. 6 of the defendant's husband, the defendant's husband stated that "the plaintiff changed 60,000 won to the plaintiff's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son'

However, C does not necessarily know the existence of a monetary loan contract as a matter of course because it is not a party to exchange money, and C does not have any ground to see that it was possible for C to know the existence of a monetary loan contract. There was a dispute over the existence of a monetary loan contract before C and D and the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff, which led to the aggravation of the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the Plaintiff’s child, who was the second grade of the middle school, called the Defendant (Evidence 5 and No. 6). As such, C, which is the Plaintiff’s deceptive act, may be considered as the best way to recover the relationship, regardless of the existence of a monetary loan loan and the “payment of the amount claimed by the Plaintiff,” which becomes worse due to the aggravation of the family relationship as above, and the Defendant received money from the Plaintiff at the maturity of the national bank. < Amended by Act No. 11374, Feb. 28, 2012>