1. The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

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

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the evidence No. 1 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, it is recognized that the Plaintiff lent KRW 50 million to the Defendant on April 25, 2013, and barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to return the said loan to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

2. The defendant's defense of the period of validity of the above loan is asserted to the effect that the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's request because the period of repayment of the above loan has not yet arrived. Thus, it is acknowledged that the period of repayment of the loan of this case was set on April 30, 2018 in full view of the whole purport of the argument in the statement No. 1, and it is apparent that the above period of repayment has not yet arrived as of the date of closing argument of this case. Thus, the defendant's defense is reasonable, and the plaintiff's claim is therefore groundless.

As to this, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the Defendant again filed an application for individual rehabilitation, thereby losing the benefit of time and reaching the due date, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 1, the Defendant is recognized as having filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Seoul Central District Court 2015Da6428 on January 14, 2015, but solely on such circumstance, the Defendant loses the benefit of time due to the repayment of the loan of this case.

It is difficult to view that the time limit has arrived immediately, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the time limit of the loan has already arrived as of the date of closing argument in this case.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is not accepted.

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