2. All of the Plaintiff’s claims, including any selective claims added at the trial.

A. On March 5, 2013, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 40,000,00 to the Defendant around March 5, 2013. Since only KRW 17,500,000 among them was paid by the Defendant, the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the remaining debt amounting to KRW 22,50,000 and delay damages.

Around March 5, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 40,000 to the Defendant with respect to the Defendant’s new business (the food materials supply business of the restaurant franchise). The fact that the Defendant remitted KRW 17,500,000 to the Plaintiff four times from February 6, 2014 to June 16, 2017 is no dispute between the parties.

However, as to whether the money remitted by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is a loan, the Plaintiff voluntarily stated that the payment period or interest for the above KRW 40,000 has not been separately determined, the Defendant’s repayment of some of the money at the Plaintiff’s request cannot be readily concluded as the repayment of the loan. According to the overall purport of each of the statements and arguments and arguments stated in Articles 6 through 8, and the Defendant lent KRW 30,000 to C, a stock company, the Plaintiff of which was a inside director around June 22, 2013, and was repaid on or around July 5, 2013, and the Defendant temporarily lent the money to the Plaintiff. In light of the above facts alone, it is insufficient to deem that the Plaintiff merely lent KRW 40,00,00 to the Defendant under a loan for consumption contract, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

B. On March 5, 2013, the Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff shall return the amount of KRW 40,000,000,000 to the Defendant, upon the Plaintiff’s request, since the Plaintiff agreed to return it.

The plaintiff delivered the above KRW 40,000 from February 6, 2014 to June 16, 2017.