공사대금반환
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff’s introduction of KRW 80 million into money from May 9, 2012 to the same year.
7. Until May, 700, the defendant argued that the defendant was obligated to pay the above money to the plaintiff, and the defendant asserts that the plaintiff was the defendant's son and the deceased's son, who was the defendant's father, the Housing Improvement Corporation did not pay the money for the defendant who was the deceased's father.
The plaintiff's assertion is rejected, since there is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff's money was paid as the price of the defendant Housing Improvement Corporation, there is no legal relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant to seek the return of the above money, such as a loan for consumption, etc.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed for lack of reason.