The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Basic Facts

A. The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur who runs a Do and retail business in the trade name of “C”.

B. From January 2018 to October 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 56,918,500 in total to the Defendant’s account in the name of the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant money”).

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff agreed to be supplied with clothing from the Defendant and paid the instant money to the Defendant.

However, since the defendant did not provide the plaintiff with any clothing at all, it is obligated to refund the money of this case and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff sought the return of the instant money to the Defendant on the premise that the Plaintiff entered into a clothing supply contract with the Defendant. As such, it is insufficient to recognize that there was a clothing supply contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant solely based on the facts acknowledged earlier or the evidence No. 4, as alleged by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Rather, according to the overall purport of the documentary evidence Nos. 1 and 2 evidence, the Plaintiff was supplied with clothings for several years from the Defendant’s children in China, and the Plaintiff was supplied with clothings from D even around 2017 and remitted the relevant clothings to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant. According to the evidence and the overall purport of the oral argument, the Defendant appears to have delivered most of the instant money to D through money exchange whenever it receives the instant money from the Plaintiff. Considering the above facts and circumstances, the Plaintiff appears to have concluded the clothing supply contract, not to be the Defendant, but to have used the account in the name of the Defendant established in Korea for the purpose of transferring the clothing money.