1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Defendant is Nam-gu, Busan (hereinafter “instant loan”).

(2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 500,000 to the Plaintiff a sum of KRW 500,000,000,000 to the Defendant’s investment in the said construction project, and the Plaintiff transferred KRW 300,000,00 to the Defendant on July 3, 2012, and KRW 10,000 to the D designated by the Defendant on October 16, 2012, respectively, for investment in the said construction project.

3) Thereafter, the Defendant remitted to the Plaintiff KRW 249,00,000 on July 25, 2013, and KRW 44,600,00 on July 30, 2013, respectively. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in subparagraphs A and 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 206,40,000 ( KRW 500,000,000--293,600,000) and damages for delay.

2. Judgment on the defense of performance

A. The defendant's summary of the defendant's defense E and below representing the plaintiff

B. 2) As agreed upon by the Plaintiff, in accordance with the agreed method, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with, as it fully repaid KRW 500,000,000 in total of the Plaintiff’s investment and dividend, and accordingly, E did not receive lawful power of representation from the Plaintiff, as alleged by the Plaintiff.

Even if the plaintiff did not raise any objection for one year after he received money from the defendant, the plaintiff shall be deemed to have ratified the act of unauthorized representation of E. Thus, the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.

B. 1) The Plaintiff invested KRW 400,000,000 in the Defendant’s loan construction business of this case, as seen earlier, through E, with the knowledge of about four to five years prior to the date of recognition. 2) The Plaintiff’s name on July 19, 2013, using the Plaintiff’s seal impression and the Plaintiff’s personal seal impression issued by the Plaintiff.