1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On March 22, 2004, the Defendant Union loaned KRW 70 million to Nonparty D the right to use the commercial building of this case, which is owned by Chuncheon City to Nonparty D (hereinafter “instant right to use the commercial building”).

After that, the defendant union purchased the above profit-making right from D on June 19, 2006 in lieu of the repayment of the loan, since it is difficult to recover the loan from D.

At the time of purchase from D of the above right to use and benefit, the president of the Defendant Union was Nonparty G.

B. H organization, a superior agency of the Defendant Union, continuously demanded the Defendant Union to sell the instant commercial building purchased by the Defendant Union to the Defendant Union on the grounds that it is inappropriate to hold the right to use the commercial building of this case as non-business real estate.

Accordingly, at the time of August 28, 2009, the Defendant Union sold the instant right to use the commercial building in KRW 100 million to the I, who was the spouse of G, the president of the Defendant Union, at the same time, and at the same time loaned KRW 70 million to G as security for the said right to use the commercial building, and KRW 30 million to G.

C. Around February 2010, the election of the president of the Defendant Union was held, and the president of the Defendant Union changed from G to Nonparty B, the Plaintiff’s father.

B around July 2010, around July 2010, the Defendant Union expressed its opinion that it would purchase the right to use the commercial building in this case from G and to take over the obligation of loans to G and its spouse to the Defendant Union.

However, since it is impossible for executives and employees under the union regulations at the time to secure the right to use commercial buildings, B made the plaintiff as his/her father to be the party to the sales contract of the right to use commercial buildings in this case and the loan contract.

Accordingly, on July 30, 2010, the Plaintiff purchased the right to use the commercial building of this case from I, and obtained a loan of KRW 70 million from the Defendant Union with the right to use the commercial building of this case as a security, and thereafter, made the loan of KRW 70 million from I as above.