The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion was an executive of the Promotion Committee for the Establishment of the Association for the Development of D Housing Redevelopment Project (hereinafter “instant Promotion Committee”) of the Seo-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoyang-gu, Busan Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Seoul Special Metropolitan City Promotion Committee”), and was established in the second half of 2017, and is the head of the association.

The defendant requested the plaintiff to lend KRW 4 million per month as operating expenses of the promotion committee of this case, since the defendant had the plaintiff select as a rearrangement project operator at the above redevelopment and improvement project site, and the plaintiff was selected as a rearrangement project operator at the above redevelopment and improvement project site by lending the license of the company E.

In the first place, the principal of the Promotion Committee of this case deposited the loan with the F’s account, but the F requested the Defendant to deposit the loan to the Defendant and the office manager, and the Plaintiff deposited the total amount of KRW 58.7 million with the Defendant’s account.

On November 29, 2010, the Defendant prepared a letter of undertaking to the Plaintiff stating that “When the redevelopment project promoted by the instant promotion committee ceases to exist, the Defendant shall compensate the Defendant for the operating funds provided to the instant promotion committee in Co., Ltd.” (hereinafter “instant letter of undertaking”).

After that, the defendant and the promotion committee of this case unilaterally terminated the contract concluded with E.

As a result, the defendant borrowed KRW 58.7 million from the plaintiff, which is liable to pay to the plaintiff.

2. Determination

A. There is no dispute between the parties that the plaintiff and the promotion committee of this case concluded a contract by lending the E's license to the plaintiff.

Therefore, even according to the plaintiff's assertion, the plaintiff lent KRW 4 million per month from the defendant to the operating expenses of the promotion committee of this case, but transferred the deposit channel to F's account, and the defendant's account was changed to F's account. Article 19 also applies to the statement of evidence No. 2.