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

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff lent KRW 37,900,000 to the Defendant, and out of which KRW 17,00,000 was repaid, the Defendant paid the remainder of KRW 20,90,000 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant money”).

(2) The Defendant asserts that the amount borrowed by the Plaintiff is KRW 17,00,000,000, which was borrowed by the Defendant from the Plaintiff for the purpose of self-collection at the time of Gyeongsan, and that the said amount was repaid to the Plaintiff after the lease term expires. The Defendant did not borrow the instant money from the Plaintiff except the above KRW 17,00,000,00, and that the instant money was donated to the Defendant by the Plaintiff, etc.

B. As shown in the Plaintiff’s assertion, it is difficult to believe that part of the evidence No. 3 was written on the part of the evidence No. 1 and No. 2, and according to the evidence No. 1 and No. 2, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 37,900,00 to the Defendant’s bank account or delivered KRW 37,90,000 directly to the Defendant, and the Defendant paid KRW 17,00,000 to the Plaintiff, although the above fact of recognition alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff lent the money of this case to the Defendant, and there is no evidence to acknowledge it otherwise, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

(M) In full view of the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, and Eul's testimony and arguments, the money of this case is deemed to have been wrongfully remitted or delivered to the defendant who became aware of through the defendant's mother C, and not leased, and thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed on the grounds that it is not reasonable.