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

A. Determination as to the cause of the claim 1) Considering the facts of recognition as Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 in addition to the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts are as follows: ① The plaintiff and the defendant invest each KRW 60 million on March 18, 2014, in which the plaintiff and the defendant invested each KRW 60 million on the first floor of the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul building, and thereby jointly start-up and operate a business agreement with the content of the joint start-up and operation (hereinafter referred to as "the first business agreement").

(2) The fact that the Defendant entered into a partnership agreement, (2) as the relationship in which the Defendant had insufficient financial resources to pay the above investment amount at the time of the conclusion of the above partnership agreement, the original Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 120 million to the Defendant and treat the Plaintiff as lending KRW 60 million to the Defendant. (3) Accordingly, the Defendant prepared and delivered the loan certificate (Evidence 1, No. 1, No. 1) stating the loan amount of KRW 60 million on the same day, interest rate of KRW 60 million per annum, interest rate of KRW 60 million per annum, and maturity of payment on March 16, 2016 to the Plaintiff. (4) The Plaintiff thereafter borrowed the above investment amount of KRW 120 million in its own name (hereinafter “instant loan”).

(2) According to the above facts, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 60 million and delay damages therefor, unless there are special circumstances.

B. The Defendant’s defense 1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to transfer 50% of the Defendant’s share in D points following the conclusion of the first partnership agreement to the Plaintiff, while the Defendant agreed to repay the Defendant’s loan obligations in the amount of KRW 60 million to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s loan obligations with respect to the Defendant were extinguished in accordance with the above repayment agreement. (ii) The fact that the Plaintiff’s loan obligations with respect to the Defendant was recognized was extinguished in accordance with the above repayment agreement. (iii) From October 18, 2012, the Defendant and E maintained a partnership that jointly operates stores in G, H, I, etc. with the trade name of “F” (hereinafter “F”).

(2) On the other hand,