1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant, as the representative director of a limited liability company C (hereinafter “C”), requested the Plaintiff to lend money on or around February 2015. Accordingly, the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 100 million to the Defendant from around that time to May 2015.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the above KRW 100 million and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. The gist of the defendant's assertion is that the defendant is only the representative director on the registry of C, and all of its actual operation took charge of D, which is the defendant's husband. Since the above D borrowed KRW 100 million from the plaintiff in order to raise operation funds of C, the above loan debt is ultimately a debt of C, and it cannot be viewed as a debt of the defendant's individual.

2. In addition to the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the plaintiff remitted the sum of KRW 100 million to the deposit account in the name of C, KRW 20 million on February 10, 2015, KRW 30 million on March 10, 2015, KRW 20 million on March 20, 2015, KRW 20 million on March 20, 2015, and KRW 100 million on May 9, 2015.

However, the above facts alone are insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff lent the above KRW 100 million to the defendant who is not C, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

(B) The plaintiff asserted that the defendant, not a legal entity, has the duty to pay the above KRW 100 million, since the defendant found the plaintiff with D and requested the lending of money. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge such fact. 3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.