1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The parties' assertion

A. On February 2007, the Defendant loaned KRW 130 million to the Plaintiff, as the funds were insufficient to develop the electric source housing site located in Chuncheon City C (hereinafter “instant site”).

On February 22, 2007, the Plaintiff: (a) established a collateral security under the Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E Apartment 103 Dong 607 (hereinafter “instant apartment”); (b) paid 30% interest per annum from D; (c) lent KRW 130 million to D; and (d) lent it to the Defendant.

Since then, the Defendant lent KRW 200 million to the Defendant for the purchase of the instant land, and the Plaintiff additionally lent KRW 200 million to the Defendant on September 7, 2007.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 30 million won (=130 million won) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the instant complaint to the day of full payment.

B. The amount of KRW 30 million that the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant is not a loan, but an investment in the instant site development project that the Defendant had run through F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”).

2. According to the evidence Nos. 1, 5, and 6 of the judgment, when the plaintiff created the right to collateral security on the apartment of this case with D, the secured debtor of the right to collateral security was the defendant, and D applied for voluntary auction on the apartment of this case with the aforementioned right to collateral security, and upon the commencement of voluntary auction on November 8, 2007 with the Seoul Northern District Court G on January 31, 2008, the defendant promised to terminate the above voluntary auction until January 31, 2008. However, even if the above facts were to be acknowledged, it is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff agreed to terminate the above auction until the plaintiff was given testimony of Gap's evidence Nos. 7 and 10 and witness H, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.

Rather, the whole pleadings are made in each entry of evidence Nos. 1 to 4-2, and No. 5-3.