1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. According to the records of this case as to the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal, when the complaint of this case against the Defendants was sent to 1304 moving from Gangnam-gu Seoul FF building where the Defendants’ resident registration address was located, and it was impossible to serve documents, the court of first instance rendered the judgment in favor of the Defendants on October 11, 201 after serving the Defendants a written notice of complaint of this case and the date of pleading on the Defendants by service by public notice. The above original copy of the judgment also served by public notice, and served the Defendants on October 14, 2011. The service of the original copy of the judgment became effective against the Defendants on October 14, 201. The Defendants became aware of the fact that the court of first instance was sentenced to a compulsory auction (this court G) by the lessee under Article 1304 moving from the Seoul FF building owned by the Defendant B to April 18, 2014. According to the above facts, the Defendants could not file an appeal due to any cause not attributable to them, and thus, were lawful within the judgment of this case No. 21414.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. Under the basic facts, the Plaintiff is registered as the wife under the name of H, and is operating a wholesale and retail company of D. Defendant B is a person who operates a company I engaged in the manufacture and processing of textile products, the wholesale and retail business, and the wholesale and retail business in China, while running the Human Flachi Manufacturing E LLC in China, and Defendant C is the wife of Defendant B.

Dor H transferred KRW 51,160,000 to the bank account under Defendant C on December 16, 2005.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 3, 5, Eul evidence 4-1 through 3, Eul evidence 6-1, and the purport of whole pleadings

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the cause of the instant claim. The Plaintiff, around December 16, 2005, would ensure that the Plaintiff would lend money from Defendant B to Defendant C within one month.