1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. (1) On July 3, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) borrowed KRW 55,00,000 from the Cartool Credit Union as interest rate of KRW 5.89% on a yearly basis; and (b) the Defendant wired KRW 300,000 per month to the Plaintiff’s account from August 3, 2014 to May 2015, there is no dispute between the parties; (c) the Plaintiff lent KRW 55,00,000 to the Defendant to use as the Batotop convenience deposit, but the Defendant did not comply with the agreement to transfer KRW 300,000,000, which is equivalent to the interest on the loan, to the Plaintiff’s account every month; and (d) sought the return of the principal and interest on the loan.

However, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff transferred money to the defendant in return for the management of the plaintiff's private affiliation between the defendant and the defendant's mother.

B. Determination 1) Even though there is no dispute over the fact that the parties received money, if there is no dispute over the grounds for the receipt of money, the plaintiff who asserts that it was received as a loan for consumption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972) has the responsibility to prove that it was a loan for consumption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 2, 1972). 2) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged in light of the evidence and the overall purport of pleadings submitted by the defendant, i.e., there was a close relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant's family, and the plaintiff voluntarily stated that he did not provide financial support to the defendant's family, and the loan certificate for the money of this case has not been prepared, it is insufficient to recognize that

2. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim is rejected for this reason, and it is so decided as per Disposition.