1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Around May 2012, Nonparty C suggested that the Plaintiff jointly take over the Defendant Company and jointly take office as a joint representative and distribute shares and profits to the Plaintiff as 5:5.

The Plaintiff accepted C’s proposal and transferred KRW 70 million to C as the acquisition price of the Defendant Company on May 31, 2012.

(C) On June 15, 2012, when taking office as the representative director of the Defendant Company, but did not inform the Plaintiff of the acquisition of the Defendant Company, the Plaintiff was excluded from the management of the Defendant Company.

Accordingly, even though the Plaintiff urged C to implement the above agreement, the Plaintiff eventually failed to implement the agreement, and the Plaintiff claimed C to return the above KRW 70 million around November 2012.

Accordingly, in the event that the two developments of the non-party limited liability company were implemented and the defendant company and the two constructions were performed, the defendant company proposed that the defendant company pay the above KRW 70 million to the plaintiff in return for the payment of the sale price in lieu of the plaintiff in the manner that the plaintiff is sold in lots to the plaintiff, and that the defendant company received the above KRW 70 million in return.

Accordingly, on January 23, 2013, the two-company development, the defendant company, and the two-company construction, and the plaintiff as the purchaser, drafted a sales contract to the effect that "D 1, 202, 13,000 won for the sale price, and the sale price shall be completed by the defendant company" (hereinafter referred to as the "sale contract of this case").

As such, the Defendant Company shall be deemed to have taken over the obligation to refund the above KRW 70 million to the Plaintiff by preparing the instant contract for sale in lots. Therefore, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay the above amount to the Plaintiff.

2. In full view of the following facts: (a) Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 7 were examined; and (b) the fact-finding results of this court on June 19, 2015 on the rice market, C from the Plaintiff, based on the overall purport of the pleadings.