1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.

2. All the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendants are legal couple.

B. On September 30, 2009, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 50 million to the national bank account under Defendant B’s name (hereinafter “the national account of this case”).

C. From the national account of this case to the Nong Bank account in the name of Nonparty C (the Plaintiff’s auditor) (hereinafter “CF account”), KRW 20 million was transferred on December 4, 2009 and KRW 10 million on December 16, 2009, respectively.

Defendant A remitted five million won to the Agricultural Cooperative Account of this case on September 3, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-3 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s major assertion (1) Defendant A, around September 2009, demanded that the Plaintiff lend KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff, which means that the Plaintiff would place an order for construction work in the amount of KRW 30 billion.

(2) As it is difficult for the Plaintiff to refuse Defendant A’s request, the Plaintiff lent the said money to the Defendants by means of remitting the amount of KRW 50 million to the instant national account under Defendant B’s name.

In addition, since the above loan of Defendant A is within the scope of a daily household, Defendant A, the wife of Defendant A, is jointly and severally liable for the obligation to return the principal and interest of the loan with the Defendant A.

(3) The Defendants returned 35 million won out of the above borrowed money and did not refund the remainder of 15 million won.

(4) Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the remainder of the borrowed money and the delay damages to the Plaintiff.

B. (1) On September 30, 2009, the Plaintiff transferred the amount of KRW 50 million to the national account of this case to the Defendants, and whether the said amount was “loan” or Defendant A used the said amount as part of the “Japanese History” or there is no other evidence to acknowledge it as evidence.

(2) Rather, according to the facts that there is no dispute, Eul evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 5, 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings, the whole arguments are as follows: ①.