1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant invested in shares with the plaintiff and divided profits into half, and invested KRW 45 million.

After that, the defendant filed an application for a payment order against the plaintiff to return all KRW 45 million to the plaintiff who did not distribute profits due to the failure of investment, and the above payment order became final and conclusive because the plaintiff was served with the above payment order and failed to comply with the objection period.

However, since the money that the Plaintiff received from the Defendant is not a loan but an investment bond that is not scheduled to be returned, the enforcement force of the above payment order should be excluded.

2. According to the evidence evidence No. 1, it can be acknowledged that the Daegu District Court Order No. 2014Guj1435, the Defendant filed against the Plaintiff, which became final and conclusive on March 20, 2014, and the cause of the claim for the above payment order is that the Plaintiff, by deceiving the Defendant, embezzled the above money by using it for personal purposes, and did not repay the said money.

Thus, unlike the plaintiff's assertion, the plaintiff's claim for the above payment order is a tort caused by embezzlement or an agreement amount arising from the preparation of a letter, and thus, the plaintiff's claim is without merit from this point.

In addition, according to the statements in Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, it is recognized that the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for 8 months (the Daegu District Court 2014Kadan2993) and the plaintiff prepared a written statement that he will fully repay the investment money on December 20, 2013, and thus, the plaintiff's assertion cannot be recognized as a mother.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case without merit is dismissed.