1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

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

The plaintiff asserts upon the defendant's request that the construction cost of the building C in the case of the strike that the defendant was under construction will be paid on behalf of the defendant, and that the construction work will be completed, and that the construction work will be paid on behalf of the defendant, and that the construction business operator paid the total amount of KRW 90,375,690 on behalf of the defendant, or lent the money to the construction business operator, and that only 25,490,000 among them was paid, and that there were 5,470,000 documents such as receipts and deposit slips.

In regard to this, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff requested the construction of the above construction to the plaintiff and completed the construction work, and did not lend the construction work, and that the extinctive prescription of the above construction work claim is three years, so the above claim has expired and expired.

According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments as follows: (a) the Plaintiff was a husband of the Defendant; (b) was engaged in the construction business with the name of “D” at the time; and (c) around September 2006, the Defendant was in the state of suspending construction due to the shortage of funds, while engaging in construction of the housing and the Ka Center building located in the land located in C, the ownership of the Plaintiff; (d) the Defendant issued a tax invoice by directly receiving a written order, receipt, etc. from the construction business operator; (c) the portion of the Ka Center building was received from the construction business operator in the name of “B” or “D”; and (d) the Plaintiff received a receipt from the construction business operator in the name of “B” or entered the details of the expenditure of the construction cost in his account; and (d) the payment statement was prepared by the said construction business operator in the name of the Defendant; and (e) the payment statement was made by the said construction business operator in the name of the said construction business operator and the Defendant did not issue the tax invoice to the construction business operator.