1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. E, the representative director of C and D (hereinafter “D”), who is the Plaintiff’s relative, established D and started the apartment business in the first F of the first PF in the racing city. Upon purchasing the business site, E had a promise to receive KRW 25 billion from the financial right, deceiving the Plaintiff to seek the land contract amount. The Plaintiff, from March 30, 2006 to May 30, 2006, lent KRW 1,765,00,000 in total to D.

B. D, C or E lent KRW 130,000 to the Defendant around July 11, 2006.

C. On March 10, 2008, D transferred to the Plaintiff the loan claim amounting to KRW 130,000,000 as stated in Paragraph (b) against the Defendant for the repayment of the loan obligation as stated in Paragraph (a). As such, the Plaintiff primarily sought payment of KRW 130,000,000 to the Defendant as the assignee of the claim and damages for delay.

The Plaintiff has a claim for damages arising from the tort described in paragraph (1) against D, C, and E against the loan claim described in paragraph (1).

Preliminaryly, the Plaintiff, as a creditor of D, C, or E, sought a payment of KRW 130,000,000 and damages for delay as stated in Paragraph (b) from the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff.

2. Determination

A. First, as to the Defendant’s main defense of safety, the Defendant asserted that there was no standing for the Plaintiff, since D did not transfer the Plaintiff’s primary claim against the Defendant to the Plaintiff, or the Plaintiff, the assignee of the claim, notified the Defendant of the assignment of claims.

However, the defendant's defense is without merit since the person who asserts that he is the right to demand performance has standing to sue in the lawsuit of performance.

B. It is insufficient to recognize that D, C, or E lent KRW 130,000 to the Defendant solely on the basis of each description of health unit, Gap evidence of Nos. 1 through 7 (including household numbers), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion based on this premise is added.