1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant requested the Plaintiff to lend money from time to time to time to time to the Plaintiff, called “A in marriage with the Defendant’s female student,” and on August 5, 2010, the Plaintiff began to transfer KRW 450,00 to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant, and thereafter, transferred KRW 57,332,50 to the Defendant during the period from November 25, 2013, and lent it to the Defendant 28 times during the period from then to November 25, 2013. (2) Moreover, the Plaintiff additionally transferred KRW 11,325,430, total sum as of February 28, 2014 to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant and lent it.

3) Of the above loans, the Defendant paid KRW 100,000,000 on May 18, 2010, and KRW 5,000,000 on July 26, 2012, and accepted the above loan obligations. (4) If the amount transferred by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is not a loan, the Defendant acquired the deposit claim equivalent to the amount remitted by the Plaintiff without any legal cause, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to return it to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

5) Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 63,57,930 (i.e., KRW 57,332,50, KRW 11,325,430-10,000-5,000) and damages for delay for the repayment of the loan or the return of unjust enrichment. (ii) The Defendant’s assertion 1) the Plaintiff and C jointly operated a business entity that jointly produces and sells a dual household with the trade name “D” between the couple. At the time, C was using a credit card in the name of the Defendant while managing the financial account under the Plaintiff’s name.

2) Money deposited from the financial account under the Plaintiff’s name to the financial account under the Defendant’s name is money transferred under the name of the Defendant, such as credit card use fee, time limit deposit, etc. used by C. Therefore, the Defendant did not borrow money from the Plaintiff, and there is no reason for the Plaintiff’s claim of this case.

2. Determination

A. The facts of recognition were that the Plaintiff got married on June 11, 2008 with C and C, a female student of the Defendant, but the agreement was reached on October 31, 2014, and the Plaintiff and C are “D.”