1. The replacement at the trial of the party, the plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. The party’s relationship 1) The Defendant’s instant project between the two parties on May 22, 2013 (hereinafter “instant project”) and the Gyeonggi-gun C development project implemented by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant project”).

(2) The Plaintiff is the representative director of D Co., Ltd. established on August 20, 2014 for the instant project, which was established on August 20, 2014.

B. The remittance of money was transferred from the account in the name of the Plaintiff to the account in the name of the Defendant, KRW 80 million on July 15, 2013, and KRW 50 million on August 14, 2013.

(hereinafter referred to as “amount of each remittance of this case”).

On November 27, 2016, B transferred the loan claim amounting to KRW 130 million to the Defendant to the Plaintiff on November 27, 2016, and notified the Defendant of the fact of the said transfer by content-certified mail on November 29, 2016. The above notification reached the Defendant on November 30, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as “transfer of claim of this case”). 【No dispute exists in the ground of recognition, Gap’s entries in Gap’s evidence Nos. 3, 4, 10, 11, and Eul’s evidence No. 2 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. 1) The Plaintiff loaned the Defendant a total of KRW 130 million of each remittance of the instant case to the primary claimant. Therefore, if the lending is not recognized, the Defendant shall return the said money to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Defendant made unjust enrichment of KRW 130 million.

B. Each remittance amount of the instant conjunctive claim was lent by B to the Defendant using the Plaintiff’s account in the name of the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff acquired the loan claim by transfer of the instant claim.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the above KRW 130 million to the plaintiff and its delay damages.

3. Judgment as to the main claim

A. On the loan argument