1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On May 9, 2015, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 12 million to the Defendant, KRW 10 million on May 19, 2015, KRW 10 million on May 19, 2015, KRW 16.6 million on June 16, 2015, KRW 6 million on June 26, 2015, KRW 50 million on August 26, 2015, and KRW 53 million on July 15, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 3 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination of the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff believed that the Defendant supplied a remote area to the Defendant and lent KRW 53 million to the Defendant. Since then, the Defendant supplied a remote area equivalent to KRW 13 million to the Plaintiff. The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 40 million and the damages for delay. 2) The Defendant’s assertion did not borrow money from the Plaintiff, and is the initial cost that the Plaintiff received in the course of running a remote area business with the Plaintiff.

B. Even if there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment as to the fact that money has been received, if the cause of the receipt is disputed, the plaintiff is responsible to prove that it was received due to the loan for consumption.

(See Supreme Court Decision 72Da221 delivered on December 12, 1972, etc.). The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff lent KRW 53 million to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The plaintiff's above assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.