1. The request is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts to the effect that the Defendant should return the money to the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff concluded a monetary loan agreement with the Defendant’s agent A and lent the money to the Defendant on April 9, 2013.

2. In light of the fact that there is no document regarding a monetary loan contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and there is a variety of grounds for the Plaintiff’s deposit of KRW 100 million in the Defendant’s account, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a monetary loan contract, and solely based on such fact, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Plaintiff and the Defendant, “the Plaintiff” and “the Defendant,” are “the Plaintiff” and the person who would return the said money.

The Plaintiff’s assertion regarding the Plaintiff’s right of representation is based on the premise that A entered into a “contract for a loan for consumption of money” with the Plaintiff, and as seen earlier, there is a lack of evidence to acknowledge the conclusion of the contract.

3. The plaintiff's claim cannot be accepted based on the conclusion of the decision, and it is so decided as per Disposition.