1. The plaintiff's appeal and the supplementary selective claims in the trial are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff deposited KRW 5,500,000 on March 24, 2011, and KRW 24,500,000 on April 4, 2011, and KRW 10,000 on April 6, 2011, and KRW 45,000,000 on June 10, 201 (hereinafter “instant money”).

B. On May 1, 2010, the Defendant registered its business with the trade name “C” and deposited KRW 5,000,000 with the account under the Plaintiff’s name on September 8, 201, as a merchant operating wholesale and retail business of leisure products from that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's ground for claim

A. The Plaintiff leased the instant money to the Defendant on April 20, 201, with the due date for repayment set at KRW 5,000,000,000 from the Defendant. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 40,00,000 upon the return of the loan and the damages for delay.

B. Even if D, not the Defendant, but the Defendant borrowed the instant money based on the claim for the nominal lender’s liability under Article 24 of the Commercial Act, the Defendant permitted D to borrow the instant money using the Defendant’s name or trade name. Therefore, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 40,000,00 which was not returned out of the instant money, and damages for delay thereof, based on the liability of the nominal lender under Article 24 of the Commercial Act.

3. Determination

A. Each statement of Nos. 1 through 8 (including a serial number) and each testimony of the party witness D and E are considered as a whole in consideration of the purport of the entire pleadings, as follows: ① A requested that the instant money be deposited into the Defendant’s account; ② A made the Plaintiff deposit the instant money into the Defendant’s account; ② during that process, the Plaintiff did not request the Defendant to deposit the instant money in the Defendant’s account; ② there was no request from the Defendant to deposit the instant money; and the Plaintiff as well as the Plaintiff.