1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

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

1. Judgment on the plaintiff's primary claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) between November 28, 2015 and June 22, 2018, the Plaintiff lent KRW 104,00,000 to the Defendant’s account from the Plaintiff’s account, and KRW 6,687,00,00 in total, to the Defendant. (2) The Defendant merely borrowed the said money from the Plaintiff’s actual owner and manager, and the Defendant did not borrow money from the Plaintiff.

B. There is no dispute as to the fact that there was a receipt of money between the judgment parties

Even if the Plaintiff’s assertion that the lending was made is asserted by the Defendant, the Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the lending was made (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da73179, Sept. 15, 2015). In this case, the Defendant is disputing the cause of remittance. Therefore, the Plaintiff must prove that the cause of receiving money was based on a loan for consumption.

In light of the above legal principles, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to deem that the Plaintiff lent KRW 10,704,50 to the Defendant, based on the following facts: (a) the Defendant submitted a written agreement, etc. prepared between D and the Defendant, which proves that the Defendant was paid debt to D by means of transfer of money from the Plaintiff’s account; (b) however, the Plaintiff failed to submit materials proving the lending of money in addition to the details of passbook transaction; and (c) there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's primary claim is without merit.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's conjunctive claim

A. If the Plaintiff’s assertion on the cause of the claim is not accepted, the remitter and the Defendant are the remitter.