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

A. The plaintiff is the mother of C, and the defendant is C's wife.

B. On June 9, 2010, C and the Defendant respectively issued and delivered to the Plaintiff the certificate of loan set forth as the principal KRW 50 million on June 9, 2010, the due date for repayment, KRW 150,000 per interest month, and ② the certificate of loan set as the principal KRW 100,000 per July 2014 (not stated the due date and interest).

(2) On June 9, 2010, the loan certificate as of June 1, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as “the second loan certificate of this case”) and the loan certificate as of July 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “the second loan certificate of this case”). 【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, each entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2,

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 150,00,000 to the Defendant and C on June 9, 2010 (monthly interest KRW 1.50,000) and KRW 100,000,000 (monthly interest KRW 200,000) around July 2014 at the request of D (the mother of C) and sought the return of the loan.

B. In light of the following circumstances revealed in the records and pleadings, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff lent KRW 150 million to the Defendant solely based on the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, including evidence Nos. 1 and 2.

1) Whether “the Plaintiff” is a lessee: there is no evidence that the Plaintiff actually paid money to C or the Defendant; and there is a fact that C remitted a certain amount to D as interest (Evidence A 3 and 4). The fact that each of the instant loan certificates was insufficient to recognize that “D” lent money to C or the Defendant solely on the ground that the name of the obligee is the Plaintiff, and that “D” other than the Plaintiff was likely to have paid a certain amount. (ii) whether “A” provided “the Defendant” with “a KRW 150 million” to “the Defendant”: according to the statement in the evidence Nos. 3 and 4, according to the fact that C transferred KRW 150,000 per month from July 201 to May 2013, and KRW 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won for interest stated in the evidence No. 1 of this case from October 2016 to June 2017.

However, the plaintiff 1 is also related to each of the loans in this case.