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

A. The plaintiff is a medical person qualified as an oriental medical doctor, and the defendant is a director in-house of C.

C is a company under commercial law, not a medical corporation.

B. On February 10, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to jointly operate one Council member in the building in Hongcheon-gun D.

C. According to the above Han-won Operating Agreement, the Plaintiff, an oriental medical doctor, provided oriental medical services to the patients at Han-won, and the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd decided to lease to the Plaintiff the Han-won Medical Center, medical appliances, etc. free of charge.

Pursuant to the profit distribution, the plaintiff and the defendant decided to distribute the net profit of KRW 500,000 per month from the first sale to the plaintiff and deducting various expenses from the sales to KRW 5:5.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendant decided to terminate the joint operation relationship between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff around July 2014, while the Plaintiff established and operated the “EAD”) under the Plaintiff’s name, but the KAD failed to properly operate the KAD.

After all, the plaintiff is operating only one member.

E. The Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a monetary loan agreement on July 29, 2014, following the completion of the joint operation of Korea Council members as above. According to this, the Defendant confirmed that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 10 million from the Plaintiff on May 16, 2014, and that the Defendant repaid the Plaintiff KRW 10 million up to July 31, 2014, KRW 10 million up to August 10, 2014, KRW 21 million up to August 25, 2014, and the obligation and obligation between the Plaintiff and the Defendant are terminated.

In addition, the defendant prepared a letter of repayment on the same date with respect to the above KRW 41 million to the plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to Gap 3, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, it cannot be deemed that a monetary loan contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, but the Defendant terminated the Korea-Japan Joint Operational Relations on July 29, 2014.