1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff established C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) and D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) and operated the aggregate extraction business from the elderly E members of the Gyeongbuk-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

around 2002, the plaintiff transferred the name of the Hju station operated by the elderly military G around 2002 to F, who is a female living together, and around 2005, he was in charge of C’s representative director position.

On June 25, 2010, the Defendant, who had been engaged in the aggregate extraction business like the Plaintiff, leased the above H-owned station from F to KRW 300 million for the lease deposit, and started to operate the gas station from that time.

With the Defendant’s introduction, the Plaintiff received KRW 200 million in total, including KRW 30 million on September 30, 2010, KRW 20 million on the Plaintiff’s name, KRW 50 million on October 8, 2010, KRW 50 million on October 13, 2010, and KRW 50 million on October 13, 2010.

Of the above KRW 200 million, KRW 46,99,190, totaling KRW 28,003,820 and KRW 46,99,190 (hereinafter “the first withdrawn amount”) and KRW 90,00,000 on October 13, 2010 (hereinafter “the second withdrawn amount”) transferred to the account in the name of the defendant.

[Grounds for recognition] A without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 8 (including various numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings, and the assertion by the parties to the judgment, the plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff voluntarily withdrawn and embezzled the amount of the first and second withdrawals while keeping the plaintiff's passbook and seal, and sought payment of KRW 50 million which is part of the plaintiff.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the first withdrawal amount is operated by the H station, and the second withdrawal amount is repaid with the oil price supplied to C and D, and the second withdrawal amount is only a repayment of part of the loan that was lent to the plaintiff, and it is not embezzled. Thus, the plaintiff's claim cannot be complied with.

Facts of recognition

The following facts are recognized by the parties to a dispute or by taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in each of the evidence and evidence Nos. 1 and 2 mentioned above.

The defendant shall make up 15 times from July 8, 2010 to December 31, 2010 as shown in the attached Table.