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

A. On March 28, 2006, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 50 million to C’s account on March 28, 2006 and lent it to the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above loan amount of KRW 50 million and damages for delay.

B. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the evidence Nos. 2 and 3 written by the Plaintiff, the fact that the Plaintiff remitted KRW 50 million to the bank account of March 28, 2006 can be acknowledged.

However, since the process of remitting money can be diverse, the fact that the above remittance amount is a loan under a monetary loan contract must be proved by the plaintiff who asserts it.

First of all, since the above-mentioned 50 million won is not C but C, it should be confirmed that the defendant, not C, constitutes the borrower of the monetary loan agreement.

As to this, the Plaintiff initially brought a lawsuit of this case with the transfer of KRW 50 million to C, and subsequently, amended the assertion that the Plaintiff lent it to C in the first place and lent it to C in the second place.

Furthermore, the Plaintiff, not the Plaintiff corporation, lent money to the Plaintiff’s representative director, and sought a request for correction of the indication of the party. Ultimately, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent the above KRW 50 million to the Defendant, and did not reverse its position from time to time according to the circumstances, and did not provide a consistent explanation.

On the other hand, according to the fact-finding certificate (No. 2) written by the defendant, it is stated that D, not the plaintiff company, invested KRW 50 million in C with the trust of the defendant, and that D, not the defendant company, invested KRW 50,000,000,000,000,

In addition, E's factual confirmation (Evidence No. 5) submitted by the Plaintiff also lends KRW 50 million to C by the Defendant's introduction.