1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On February 13, 2009 from Nonparty C’s account (National Bank D) to Nonparty D (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”)’s account, KRW 50,000,000, respectively, was transferred to the name of Nonparty E Limited Company (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and KRW 18,800,000 to the F’s account (Foreign Bank G).

B. From the above C’s account to the above F’s account on February 25, 2009, KRW 60,000 was remitted.

C. On March 5, 2009, KRW 15,000 was remitted from the above C’s account to the above F’s account.

From the above C’s account on March 16, 2009, KRW 10,000 was remitted to the above F’s account.

E. Nonparty H transferred each of the KRW 30,000,000 on July 14, 2009, to Nonparty I’s account in the name of Nonparty I (National Bank J), and KRW 20,000,000 on July 15, 2009.

F. On March 18, 2010, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 20,000,00 to the Defendant’s name account (UFK).

G. On March 24, 2010, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 3,000,000 to the account under the above Defendant’s name.

H. On April 8, 2010, KRW 3,000,000 was remitted from the above C’s account to the account under the above Defendant’s name.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap 2, 4, 8, and 10 evidence (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleading

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The defendant is a person who operates the non-party company with the non-party L, who is the birth of the defendant.

The Plaintiff, as described in paragraph (1), lent to the Defendant a total of KRW 229,80,000 (= KRW 50,000,000, KRW 18,800,000, KRW 15,000,000, KRW 30,0000, KRW 20,0000, KRW 200,000, KRW 30,0000,000, KRW 3,000,000, and KRW 3,000,000,000, and KRW 3,000,000,000, as described in paragraph (1).

In 2 pages 1, 209, “F” in the second and fourth applications for the change of the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim of November 7, 2019 appears to be each of the obvious clerical errors of “H” (Evidence 8-1, 2), “M” in the fourth and fourth applications of the same application, and “M, July 16, 2009” in the fifth and fifth applications, “F,” respectively, appears to be each of the obvious clerical errors of “Defendant” (Evidence 9, 10 evidence).

B. The defendant delivered to the plaintiff the share number and promissory note issued by the non-party company, but the above.