1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The fact that the Plaintiff transferred KRW 35 million to a bank account under the name of the Defendant on June 30, 2015 is no dispute between the parties.

As the cause of the instant claim, the Plaintiff asserted that, without interest, the Defendant, a property heir of C, was liable to repay the amount of KRW 35 million, determined and lent to the Defendant, who was friendly among her mothers, to repay the amount of KRW 35 million after one year.

First, the fact that the Plaintiff deposited the above money to the Defendant’s account is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Plaintiff lent the above money to the Defendant in light of the fact that the account in the Defendant’s name appears to have been used by the Defendant’s mother, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Furthermore, since the act of remitting money to a third party’s deposit account by means of health deposit, transfer, etc. with respect to whether the Plaintiff lent the said money to C is possible depending on various causes, such as loan for consumption, investment, donation, repayment, etc., such transfer cannot be readily concluded solely on the sole basis of the fact that there was such remittance (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da30861, Jul. 26, 2012). The Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that there was the intention of the party to the loan for consumption. (See Supreme Court Decision 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). Therefore, there is no evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s loan to C.

(The plaintiff did not submit any evidence other than the certificate of remittance to the defendant and did not appear at the date of pleading. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.