1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim claims filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit;

1. The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed to be a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

A. From around 197, the Plaintiff operated a gas station from Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government with the trade name "D gas station" (hereinafter "the gas station of this case"). The Defendant is a person who worked as a gas station of this case and is the wife of the Plaintiff.

(E) The plaintiff and the defendant are currently divorced. (B)

On September 29, 2011, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 30 million into the Defendant’s account.

C. The Plaintiff’s account was KRW 30 million from F on February 28, 2012, and KRW 50 million from G on March 6, 2012, respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 3 (including provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. On September 201, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) the Defendant borrowed the instant gas station from H and lent KRW 30 million to the Defendant; (b) on the other hand, the Defendant renounced its operation despite having been to operate the gas station independently; and (c) on January 201, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 80 million from G and F as its operating fund, and used it as its operating fund on behalf of the Defendant; and (d) paid the said money on behalf of the Defendant, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 30 million with its indemnity and KRW 80 million.

B. First of all, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 30 million to the Defendant’s account on September 29, 201 as to the Plaintiff’s assertion of lending. However, considering the circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the Plaintiff’s entries and the entire purport of pleadings as stated in subparagraph 3-2, namely, the Plaintiff’s financial transaction or management of operating funds through the Defendant’s account while operating a gas station, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Plaintiff lent KRW 30 million to the Defendant solely on account of the fact that there was a number of deposited money transactions other than the above remittances.