1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

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

1. Summary of the parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion became aware of the Defendant, an insurance solicitor, following the purchase of insurance to Samsung Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. in around 2003, and, through the Defendant, recommended not only the Plaintiff’s purchase of insurance for the company’s vehicle operated by the Defendant, but also its visitors to purchase insurance.

around 207, the Defendant left the Plaintiff with a passbook and seal deposited with the fund deposit deposit money. The Defendant started to lend money from the Plaintiff as close as it was urgently needed to cancel the fund, and thereafter lent KRW 92,513,150 from the Plaintiff until September 5, 2014.

Since the defendant did not pay the above loan even in the plaintiff's demand, the defendant sought the payment of the above loan against the defendant.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the amount the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant is not a loan, but a donation made to maintain internal relations with the Defendant, and even if not a donation, it constitutes illegal consideration and thus cannot be claimed as return thereof.

2. Determination

A. Even if there is no dispute between the parties to the relevant legal principles as to the fact that money was received, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the loan was lent is proved by the burden of proof on the Plaintiff who asserts that the loan was lent.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 2014Da26187 Decided July 10, 2014; 72Da221 Decided December 12, 1972, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Da26187, Jul. 10, 201

The fact that the plaintiff paid KRW 92,513,150 to the defendant from January 10, 2008 to September 5, 2014 does not conflict between the parties, or that the plaintiff paid KRW 92,513,150 to the defendant is recognized by the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including the serial number).

However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the descriptions of Nos. 1 through 8 (including paper numbers) and by the results of the Defendant’s personal examination and the purport of the entire pleadings, are as follows: