1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff respectively lent KRW 20 million to Nonparty C, who is engaged in the clothing wholesale business, on August 3, 2012, and KRW 5 million on March 3, 2012.

B. On November 5, 2013, upon the Plaintiff’s request, C kept clothes equivalent to KRW 500,000 from the Defendant’s “D” (hereinafter “instant logistics center”) A, Dong 210,00,000, and offered them as security for the amount of existing loan to the Plaintiff.

C. On November 5, 2013, the Defendant: (a) decided to keep the above clothing goods from C; (b) drafted a contract for the storage of goods (hereinafter “instant consignment contract”) with the content of “the name of the goods: clothing, C/T number: 210, and the date of storage: 5 November 2013: Storage fees: 150,000, and the contractor: the Plaintiff and the agent: C” (hereinafter “instant consignment contract”).

On the other hand, C requested the Plaintiff to lend additional money on January 2014, and upon the Plaintiff’s request for additional security, the Defendant received the goods borrowed from a third party No. 116 of B Dong 116 of the Distribution Center on January 20, 2014.

E. On January 20, 2014, the Defendant entered “B Dong 116 Clothing” at the lower right-hand side of the instant consignment contract as the new clothing goods of C were put into storage, and entered “B Dong 116 Clothing” at the lower right-hand side of the instant consignment contract.

F. However, as C was unable to borrow the additional money from the Plaintiff, C arbitrarily removed the clothing goods that came from No. 116 of the instant logistics center B around January 22, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, witness C's testimony, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The party's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 of the parties concerned is the security for the plaintiff's loan claim against B/16 of the logistics center of this case. Despite the fact that the defendant was aware of such fact, the defendant allowed C to remove the above clothes without the plaintiff's consent or approval.