1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 260 million to the Defendant from around 2008 to around 2011 as a contribution fund of the Welfare Association of an incorporated association. After that, the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 260 million as a loan around June 201, the fact that the Plaintiff agreed to pay the amount of KRW 260 million to the Plaintiff is either a dispute between the parties or according to the purport of the entry in the evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings.

On the other hand, around April 27, 2012, the Plaintiff received 40 million won out of the above money from the Defendant as a substitute.

According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay the above loan obligations remaining to the plaintiff amounting to KRW 220 million (=the above 260 million - the above repayment amount to KRW 40 million) and damages for delay.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion and its determination, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the full amount of KRW 260 million, and thus, we examine it.

In light of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and 9 (the plaintiff alleged that the certificate of confirmation No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1) and receipt (the certificate No. 5) were forged, but the statement of evidence No. 3 alone is insufficient to acknowledge the plaintiff's assertion of forgery, and no other evidence exists to acknowledge it), the defendant paid 50 million won to the plaintiff on December 20, 201, and the defendant paid 210 million won to the plaintiff on April 25, 2012, instead of paying 20 million won of the above loan obligations remaining between the plaintiff on or around April 25, 201, the defendant transferred the ownership of the defendant's automobile and the defendant's forest land No. 17,355 square meters owned by the defendant to the plaintiff on April 25, 2012, and accordingly, the defendant transferred the ownership of the defendant's automobile to the plaintiff on April 25, 2012.