1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Plaintiff’s assertion

The plaintiff filed for a loan with the trade name of "C" and the defendant who operated the manufacturing business of industrial machinery parts from July 2004.

On September 29, 2005, the Defendant converted C into a corporation and established D (hereinafter “D”).

The Defendant requested the Plaintiff to lend the operating fund from time to time while operating D, and accordingly, the principal loaned by the Plaintiff to the Defendant by July 22, 2008 was KRW 186,207,781, and the unpaid interest amount was KRW 20,156,294.

The Plaintiff thereafter lent KRW 19,60,000,000 to the Defendant on May 13, 2009, and KRW 87,000,000 on May 6, 2010.

The plaintiff filed a claim for indemnity amount of KRW 350,000,000 with the loan of KRW 350,000 with D Operation Funds, provided each land owned by the plaintiff as security to the bank.

However, on April 2, 2013, the Plaintiff paid a total of 358,30,680 won by subrogation to the bank on April 2, 2013, including the principal, interest, and interest in arrears.

In conclusion, the defendant shall pay the plaintiff a total of KRW 671,272,755 (i.e., loan 186,207,781 (i.e., loan 20,156,294 won) with interest rate of KRW 20,156,294 on May 13, 2009, and KRW 87,600,000 for loans of KRW 87,308,680 for indemnity as of May 6, 2010. However, the defendant shall claim damages for delay from the date following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case.

First of all, it is not sufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 186,207,781 (20,156,294) to the Defendant by July 22, 2008 only with the statement of KRW 186,207,781 (the unpaid interest balance of KRW 20,156,294), and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise

In addition, according to Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 9, although the plaintiff deposited KRW 19,60,000 on May 13, 2009, and KRW 87,00,00 on May 6, 2010 into the D Corporation account, it is not enough to recognize that the plaintiff lent the above money to the defendant who is not D, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.