1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff asserts that on December 22, 2014, the plaintiff lent KRW 50 million to the defendant, a woman living together, according to the monetary loan agreement, and thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the above amount.

The defendant asserts that the above 50 million won was not borrowed, but the settlement amount following the liquidation of the past business relations, and the defendant received the plaintiff's clothes in the name of compensation for the part that contributed to the operation of the plaintiff's clothing store.

2. In the event of a transfer of money to another person’s deposit account, etc., such transfer may be made on various legal grounds, and the fact that the remitted money is a lending under a monetary loan contract must be proved by the plaintiff who asserts that it is a lending under the said contract.

According to the statement No. 1, the plaintiff transferred the sum of KRW 50 million to the defendant's bank account on December 22, 2014.

However, in full view of the following facts: (a) no document was prepared to recognize a monetary lending relationship, such as a loan certificate, between the Plaintiff and the Defendant; and (b) the Plaintiff did not present any assertion as to the period of payment, existence of interest agreements, provision of security, etc. despite asserting that the above remittance amount was a loan; and (c) the Plaintiff and the Defendant, as a pro-Nam, cannot avoid any room for providing money by forming a business relationship or labor relationship; and (d) the above remittance alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff lent money to the Defendant under a loan agreement

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.