The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant invested in the Bitcoin Exchange, C, but around January 2017, the Plaintiff and C dialogueed with the Plaintiff and the said C, and the actual details of transactions he was in operation.

B. The Defendant also recommended the Plaintiff to make an investment in C, and the Plaintiff transferred the sum of KRW 100 million to the bank account under the name of the Defendant, KRW 15 million on October 10, 2017, KRW 50 million on October 22, 2017, KRW 100 million on November 20, 2017, and KRW 35 million on behalf of the Plaintiff, thereby having the Defendant operate C on behalf of the Plaintiff.

C. Meanwhile, the C Bitco Exchange was closed on January 17, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1, 2, and 3 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was not aware of the virtual picture transaction method, and thus, C was entrusted to the Defendant, and the Defendant was acting on behalf of the Plaintiff.

Between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, a delegation relationship under Article 680 of the Civil Act was established, and the Defendant breached the duty of due care of a good manager based on such delegation relationship and caused loss to the investment amount.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 10 million won of investment and damages for delay.

B. In light of the judgment, the evidence alone presented by the Plaintiff is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant incurred a loss of the Plaintiff’s investment due to breach of duty of care, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

(A) The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant had the Plaintiff invest KRW 100,000 for the purpose of using virtual currency. However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Defendant, by deceiving the Plaintiff, made an investment of KRW 100,000,00,000, is insufficient, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise). The Plaintiff also asserted that the Defendant expressed his intent to repay the investment amount.