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

A. On October 21, 2014, the Plaintiff is a person who has a trouble in early illness, and the Defendant is an institution that was appointed as a trustee in bankruptcy by Busan District Court 2014Hahap102 as the Maritime Savings Bank (hereinafter “Maritime Savings Bank”).

B. On August 8, 2011, the Plaintiff applied for a loan of KRW 6,00,000 to the Solo Savings Bank for a loan of KRW 34% per annum, and three years of loan, and the Solo Savings Bank for the same month.

9. The Plaintiff loaned the said KRW 6,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant loan agreement”). C.

On the other hand, Nonparty B, while protecting the Plaintiff who was suffering from her from her own disease for the purpose of medical care, lived together with her mother, height, and he/she living at the her port where he/she was born. On October 31, 2014, in the case of Jinwon District Court, Jinwon District Court Decision 2013Dadan1331, 2014Kadan644 (merged) fraud, etc., Nonparty B purchased freight vehicles and acquired property benefits by receiving the loan contract of this case from the Plaintiff to the agricultural bank account in the name of her birth and acquired property benefits by receiving the loan contract of this case.

It was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for facts constituting a crime.

B appealed against the above judgment, and withdraw it, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on November 12, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 4 evidence, Eul 3 to 6 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that at the time of the instant loan agreement, the loan agreement in this case is null and void, since the Plaintiff only exchanged with the person in charge of the Solo Savings Bank as the Plaintiff was in a state of his/her own business capacity, as it is written in B’s paper.

Therefore, there is no obligation of the plaintiff to the defendant under the loan contract of this case which is null and void.

B. According to each of the records of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the Plaintiff’s total intelligence as the boundary level of I Q 71 and thereby has a disability in the port-to-land.