1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion lent a total of KRW 40 million to the Defendant on August 29, 2014 and September 1, 2014.

2. Even if there is no dispute as to the fact that there is the receipt of money between the judgment parties, the reason that the plaintiff received money is a loan for consumption, and if the defendant asserts that it was a loan for consumption, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that it was received due to the loan for consumption.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972). The fact that the Plaintiff remitted a total of KRW 40 million to the Defendant on August 29, 2014 and September 1, 2014 is either no dispute between the parties or may be acknowledged by the statement under subparagraph 1.

However, the defendant argues to the effect that C, which borrowed new construction funds from the defendant not due to a loan for consumption, transfers ownership of a new building to the plaintiff and received a loan from the plaintiff in the name of the plaintiff and repaid the above loan to the defendant with some of the funds. In light of each of the statements in subparagraphs 1 through 15, and witness C's testimony supporting the defendant's argument, it is insufficient to recognize that the above money was received by itself as a loan for consumption as alleged by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is dismissed as there is no reasonable ground.