1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 2, 2005, C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) for which the Plaintiff had worked as representative director entered into a service contract with the Defendant on the purchase of approximately 30,000 square meters, including Gwangju Northern-gu D, and approximately 165 parcels, to be used as a site for the construction project of multi-family housing between the Defendant and the Defendant, with respect to the purchase of the land in question, the Defendant performed the business of purchasing the land in question, and paid the service cost to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant service contract”).

Article 4 of the instant service contract provides that the Defendant’s service cost of KRW 600,000 shall be KRW 600,000,000 and three times (Paragraph 1) shall be paid in advance by C to the Defendant, and shall be paid in advance by the loan certificate at the time of payment.

(2)as set forth in paragraph (2).

B. On June 9, 2005, the Plaintiff paid KRW 25,000,000 to the Defendant respectively, and KRW 25,000,000 on June 17, 2005.

C. On June 17, 2005, the Defendant borrowed KRW 50,000 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”) with the purport that “50,000,000 won was borrowed, interest rate shall be 24% per annum, and the due date shall be June 16, 2006.”

(1) 【No dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 666, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. On June 17, 2005, the Plaintiff lent KRW 50,000,00 to the Defendant for a fixed period on June 17, 2005, with interest rate of KRW 24% per annum, and due date of payment on June 16, 2006. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above amount, interest thereon, and delay damages. (2) Even if the Defendant received KRW 50,00,000 from the Plaintiff as advance payment of the instant service contract, the Defendant failed to perform its duty under the instant service contract, and thus, the Defendant must return it.

B. Judgment 1) The facts that the Defendant prepared and issued the instant loan certificate to the Plaintiff on June 17, 2005 are as shown earlier, but the above facts of recognition and the evidence Nos. 2 through 4 (including the branch number) are as follows.

each entry in the record.