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

A. On March 16, 201, the Plaintiff: (a) prepared and delivered a loan certificate from the Defendant on March 16, 201, KRW 50,000,000, interest monthly; and (b) deposited KRW 50,000,000 with the Defendant’s account on February 28, 2013; and (c) deposited the money from the said account on the same day.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, Eul 4, 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition on the market, the defendant is obligated to pay the above loans and interest and delay damages to the plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant offered the above loan certificate to the Plaintiff constitutes a false declaration of intent through which the Plaintiff conspireds, and the above KRW 50,000,000 deposited to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant was received by the Plaintiff.

B. In light of the purport of the entire argument in Eul evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the defendant conspired with the plaintiff in order to reduce the burden of capital gains tax on real estate held in title trust by the plaintiff, and that the defendant prepared a false loan certificate to the plaintiff although he did not intend to borrow money from the plaintiff, and therefore, the loan agreement for consumption with the above loan certificate is null and void because it is based on a false declaration of intent (Article 108 of the Civil Act). The above argument by the defendant is with merit.

3. According to the conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is without merit.