1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that: (a) the Defendant, who had engaged in the business of selling secondhand goods with the trade name “D” as a de facto marital relationship with Nonparty C, transferred KRW 217,983.63 on February 12, 2014 to the Defendant’s account as a business fund; (b) KRW 8,400,000 on February 3, 2014; and (c) KRW 14,000,000 on March 7, 2014; and (d) transferred USD 217,983.63 on February 12, 2014 to the Defendant by means of lending USD 32,00,000 in total to the Defendant’s account; and (d) lending USD 4,00,000 on March 12, 201; and (e) lending KRW 30,000,000 on March 31, 201.

2. According to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the defendant is the representative of the company "D" and the plaintiff transferred the plaintiff's total amount of KRW 78,400,000 to the defendant and C account, but it is found that the plaintiff has a total of KRW 78,40,000 ( there is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff calculated the Hong Kong USD 32,00,000 to the defendant on February 12, 2014). The statement in Gap evidence No. 4 and testimony of witness E alone, which the defendant operated a partnership with Eul.

It is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff entered into a monetary loan contract with the Defendant and lent the above KRW 78,00,000 to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.