1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On January 17, 2006, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 50 million to a bank account in the name of C on January 17, 2006, and the same year.

4. 27. A bank account in the name of the defendant, 30 million won, and the same year;

7. 19. Remittance 90 million won in total, such as remitting 10 million won to the same account.

B. After receiving a monthly amount from D, the Defendant transferred the monthly amount from D to the bank account under the Plaintiff’s name from February 17, 2006 to November 29 of the same year, 3.5 million won if the monthly amount is entered, 1.9 million won if many, and 4.5 million won per month from December 27 of the same year to December 4, 2007.

C. C is the representative director of E Co., Ltd. which engages in purchase at the discount of bills, credit business, etc., and D is the person who served as the managing director of the said company.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, each entry of Eul evidence 3 (including paper numbers), witness G, and C's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is the above.

1.(a)

The remittance amount of KRW 90 million in the judgment of the court below is set at 6% per annum by the defendant's request that the money to be invested be invested in corporation E, and the defendant sought to pay the above loan amount of KRW 50 million and the agreed interest thereon to the defendant, and the defendant asserts to the purport that the above amount of KRW 90 million was invested in corporation E upon the defendant's introduction, and the defendant merely received interest equivalent to the investment amount of the plaintiff from corporation E and remitted it to the plaintiff's account, and thus the defendant cannot accept the plaintiff's request.

B. As to whether the above remittance amounting to KRW 90 million was lent to the Defendant by the Plaintiff, there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the above remittance amount solely based on the statement in the health room, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, the following circumstances, i.e., the plaintiff and the defendant as to each remittance amount, known by the respective statements in subparagraphs 2 and 4 as well as the purport of the whole pleadings.