1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be found either as a dispute between the parties or as a whole by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to the entry in the evidence No. 3.

Defendant C is the Plaintiff, and the Defendants are married.

B. On July 2015, Defendant B received a contract from the Plaintiff for construction of the D Ground Building (including the construction of the general steel structure 98.9 square meters, 2 stories 9.43 square meters, 1st floor of 1st floor of the general steel structure, 9.43 square meters, and 1st floor restaurants; hereinafter “instant construction work”), and completed buildings were awarded a contract.

C. Defendant B commenced the instant construction on or around July 17, 2015, completed the construction on or around October 14, 2015, and obtained approval for use on or around October 22, 2015.

On October 29, 2015, the Plaintiff opened a restaurant (E) on the first floor of the instant building.

2. Determination as to the claim for a loan of KRW 9.1 million

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that only one month was used by the Defendants was returned, and the Plaintiff loaned KRW 2.5 million and KRW 5 million on November 1, 2015, KRW 5.5 million on January 21, 2016, KRW 600,000 and KRW 9.1 million on February 4, 2016.

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to return KRW 9.1 million to the Plaintiff.

B. Even if there is no dispute as to the fact that there is an amount of money between the parties to the judgment, the reason that the plaintiff received it is a loan for consumption, and the defendant is liable to prove that it was received due to a loan for consumption if it is disputed.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972). First of all, according to the above legal principles, according to the health account of KRW 2.5 million and KRW 5.5 million as of November 11, 201, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 2.5 million to Defendant C’s bank account at each deposit account in the name of the said bank and the new bank, according to the records of evidence Nos. 3, 8-1, 35, and 36, respectively, the Plaintiff’s transfer of KRW 2.5 million and KRW 5.5 million to the Defendant C’s bank account in the name of the said bank. However, the new bank in the Plaintiff’s name of the head of the bank can be recognized as printing “amount lent” for KRW 5.5 million.