1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On December 12, 2008, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 25,000,000 (hereinafter “instant loan”) to B, who served as a military noncommissioned officer, as a military noncommissioned officer, according to the support system for lease of key money for lease on a deposit basis by the military executives.

B. B died on November 1, 2014

(hereinafter referred to as “the Deceased”). [The grounds for recognition] There is no dispute, and each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 7

2. Assertion and determination

A. The gist of the parties’ assertion 1) The Plaintiff is the Defendant’s husband at the time of the instant loan, and as the Defendant consumeds the instant loan to the daily home of the Defendant couple by borrowing the instant loan from the Defendant’s husband at the time of the instant loan, appropriating the instant loan to the money for lease on a deposit basis or cost of living. As such, the Defendant is liable to repay the instant loan pursuant to Article 832 of the Civil Act. 2) The Defendant did not appropriate the instant loan borrowed from

B. The facts that the deceased borrowed the loan of this case from the plaintiff as a key money for lease on a deposit basis are seen above, and the fact that the deceased was the husband of the defendant at the time of the loan of this case does not conflict between the parties.

However, according to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 8-2, 3, and 1 through 8, the defendant leased the house located in Gwangju Northern-gu D from December 21, 2007 to 50,000,000 won as of December 21, 2007, due to lack of the payment capacity of the deposit money at the time, the defendant's father E paid 2,000,000 won among the deposit money for the deposit for the deposit for the deposit for the deposit for the deposit for the deposit for the lease on March 24, 2008, and the remaining 48,000,000 won as of March 24, 2008, the deceased did not pay military salary to the defendant as living expenses, etc. In addition, it can be acknowledged that the defendant borrowed from E on the pretext of necessity for promotion, as well as that of borrowing KRW 15,00,00,000 from E on June 25, 2007.

In light of these facts, the Deceased borrowed the instant loan from the Plaintiff as a security deposit.