1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

There is no dispute over the fact that the plaintiff remitted 70 million won to the defendant on January 6, 2010.

The Plaintiff claimed the payment of the loan and the payment. The Defendant asserted that there was no obligation to return, since the Plaintiff was paid for the transfer of the lessee’s status as to the share in the cosmetic operated by the Defendant and the above cosmetic building.

According to the purport of the arguments as follows: (a) around 2005, the Defendant: (b) around 2005, leased Nos. 301 of Young-gu D 3 to e, a deposit of KRW 50 million; (c) around January 201, the Defendant operated the cosmetic; (d) around 2010, the Plaintiff, an employee of the cosmetic, was 50% of the cosmetic; and (e) exceeded the lessee’s status; (e) the lessee’s name was changed on January 27, 2010; and (e) on February 1, 2010, the lessee operated the cosmetic jointly for three months thereafter; and (e) the Defendant operated the cosmetic for more than three months; and (e) the said building was unable to operate the cosmetic.

In light of the above facts, the money paid by the Plaintiff appears to be the consideration for the transfer of the right to lease and the right to share in the beauty art room. Unlike others, it is insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s assertion that the said money was a loan or a money premised on the return, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.