1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 60,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from October 18, 2013 to the day of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 28, 2007, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 60 million with the passbook in the name of the Defendant’s personal name (hereinafter “the instant money”).

B. The Plaintiff was paid as a member of the Defendant Company C from December 10, 2007 to December 2009.

C. Around December 28, 2007, the Defendant participated in the capital increase with capital increase by C and acquired 70,000 shares (5,000 won per face value per share, 35,000 shares).

On December 19, 201, C applied for corporate rehabilitation on December 2009, C was decided to authorize rehabilitation with the content of reduction of capital and retirement of existing shares at the rate of 1/10.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the above money was loaned to the defendant, and thus, the defendant claimed the return of the above money, and that the defendant did not have any obligation to return the money since he remitted the money to the defendant to acquire 6,000 won per share as 10,000 won per share while participating in the capital increase with capital increase of the corporation C, which was scheduled to be listed.

B. As to the nature of the instant money, a person registered as a shareholder in the register of shareholders shall be presumed to be a shareholder of the company, and in order to reverse this, the facts must be proved by the parties asserting the title trust relationship. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of the preceding party, the statement of the evidence No. 2, and the overall purport of the pleading, ① the Plaintiff deposited the instant money into a passbook in the name of the Defendant, not the account of C, but the account of the Defendant, ② there is no assertion or proof that the Plaintiff exercised the authority as a shareholder of C after transferring the instant money, ③ there is no assertion or proof that the Plaintiff transferred the money to a shareholder of the Defendant, ③ the Defendant transferred KRW 60 million at a time similar to the Plaintiff, but retired from the office around July 208.