1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 13, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a credit transaction agreement with the Japanese Savings Bank on July 13, 201, on July 13, 201, with a general loan for the subject of credit, an annual interest rate of 9%, and an amount of credit limit of 6.5 billion won (hereinafter “instant one loan agreement”) and received the said loan from the Plaintiff’s Japanese Savings Bank loan account on the same day.

B. On October 27, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a credit transaction agreement with the Japanese Savings Bank on October 27, 201, with a general loan for the subject of credit, on October 27, 201, with an annual interest rate of 9% per annum, and nine billion won per credit limit (hereinafter “instant two loan agreement”) and received the said loan from the Plaintiff’s Japanese Savings Bank account on the same day.

C. On January 26, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a credit transaction agreement with the Japanese Savings Bank on January 26, 201, with a general loan for the subject of credit, an annual interest rate of 9% per annum, and an amount of credit limit of 13 billion won (hereinafter “instant three loan agreement”) and received the said loan from the Plaintiff’s Japanese Savings Bank loan account on the same day.

On September 7, 2012, the Seoul Central District Court declared bankruptcy against the Japanese Savings Bank as the Japanese Savings Bank No. 2012Hahap96, and appointed the defendant as the trustee in bankruptcy of the Japanese Savings Bank.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 1 to 4, 6 through 8 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the primary cause of claim A) The Plaintiff asserted that each of the instant loan agreements is the actual debtor of each of the instant loan agreements is a stock company B (hereinafter “B”) and C (hereinafter “C”), and the Plaintiff, who is an employee of the same person of the Japanese Savings Bank, merely a company D (hereinafter “D”) in the form of principal debtor in order to avoid the restriction on the limit on the extension of loans to the same person of the Japanese Savings Bank, and the Japanese Savings Bank also understood this, and thus, each of the instant loan agreements was concluded with the intent not to be liable to the Plaintiff as the debtor.