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

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant made a false statement to the Plaintiff that he would purchase a multimond if he had no intention or ability to purchase the multimond, and acquired 52 million won from the Plaintiff by deceiving the Plaintiff. 2) The Plaintiff provided the multimond to the Defendant, thereby paying KRW 52 million to the Defendant. Since the Defendant did not supply the multimond, it is required to return KRW 52 million for the goods.

3) On April 1, 2004, the Plaintiff lent KRW 52 million to the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff damages or the amount of goods borrowed, or the amount borrowed, KRW 52 million, and damages for delay.

B. As to the claim for damages caused by a tort, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant acquired 52 million won by deceptioning that the Plaintiff would purchase the Damond at the face of the week. Therefore, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit. 2) There is no evidence to support that the Plaintiff paid 52 million won to the Defendant as the purchase price of the Damond. Thus, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

3) According to each of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including branch numbers) as to the loan argument, the plaintiff sent 20 million won to the defendant on April 1, 2004. The defendant may recognize the fact that on March 14, 2008, the defendant prepared and corresponded to the plaintiff on March 14, 2008, "(22,000,000), borrowed from the plaintiff around April 1, 2004, to the plaintiff (20,000,000), to the plaintiff (2,00,000,000 won) and to the plaintiff (2,00,000 won, as the case may be, after being released each month."

According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff lent KRW 20 million to the defendant. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay KRW 20 million to the plaintiff unless there are special circumstances.

(b).