1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion is a person who operated the "D Care Center" on the third and second floor of Jeju, and the plaintiff is a caregiver's qualification holder.

In around 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into an agreement with the Defendant to provide the Plaintiff with one of the three floors for residential purposes, namely, “(i) the Defendant opened the medical care center to the third floor of the D Care Center; (ii) the Plaintiff invested KRW 70 million at the facility cost; and (iii) the Defendant pays the Plaintiff in installments by adding the interest calculated at the rate of 5.7% per annum to the principal and interest calculated for five years; and (iv) the Defendant employs the Plaintiff as a caregiver and pays the Plaintiff KRW 1.3 million per month.”

Accordingly, the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with funds necessary for the opening of the medical care center business, and instead of preparing a contract, entrusted the representative of the medical care center as a collateral, and operated the “E-medical care center” on May 13, 2015, by employing the employees.

However, the defendant operated the E-Medical Care Center differently from the original agreement, or did not pay the investment amount to the plaintiff in installments.

On August 2015, the Plaintiff rescinded the agreement with the Plaintiff on the grounds of the Defendant’s nonperformance of obligations as above.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the amount stated in the claim as consolation money.

B. As to the conclusion of an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the same content as the Plaintiff alleged, it is difficult to believe that some of Gap evidence 1-1-1 and witness F testimony in light of witness G testimony, and it is insufficient to recognize only the descriptions of evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 5, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit without further review.

2. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.