1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

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

1. Judgment on the main claim (lease)

A. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff's claim is the plaintiff's husband D, only is the nominal representative director, so-called president of the corporation C (hereinafter "the corporation of this case"), and the person who establishes and operates the corporation is the plaintiff's husband D.

On the management of the company of this case, E, the defendant's living together and the wife of D, took charge of the practice, and D managed the defendant's seal impression and passbook and made an important decision making.

The Plaintiff Intervenor served as a director of the Plaintiff Company from around 2008 to 2011.

The Plaintiff’s Intervenor, before the establishment of the instant company, lent KRW 35,00,000 to the account under the name of the Defendant on the condition that the Plaintiff would receive interest at 9% per annum while the Plaintiff was delegated with all authority over the establishment of the instant company upon the request of D prior to the instant company’s establishment.

For this purpose, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor drafted a loan for consumption with the Defendant’s seal imprinted in E or D’s custody, and the said KRW 35,000,000 was used as part of the incorporated capital of the instant company.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the above money and interest, etc. as the borrower of the above loan for consumption. Even if the Plaintiff’s Intervenor did not have the authority to conclude the above loan for consumption on behalf of the Defendant, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor is the person granted the basic power of attorney for the establishment of the instant company from the Defendant, D, E, etc., and concluded the loan for consumption with the Plaintiff under the status of the Defendant’s representative holding the Defendant’s seal impression, and the Defendant bears the obligation to return the borrowed money under the above loan for consumption pursuant to the express

B. First of all, on March 19, 2009, the fact that the Plaintiff was transferred KRW 35,000,000 to the account under the name of the Defendant was transferred to the Plaintiff is without dispute between the parties.

(b).