1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “B”) performed the construction of new apartment units of the Drebuilding Maintenance and Improvement Project Association (hereinafter referred to as “Drelarge Construction”) that had been implemented in the Seocho City in 2004, and had the Construction Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Crelarge Construction”) implement the relevant basic civil construction works while carrying out the construction of the Drelarge Building.

Around January 2005, the Plaintiff received a contract for each of the above new construction works from B, and transferred or delivered KRW 300 million in total to the Defendant, the representative director of B, from December 30, 2014 to January 1, 2015, prior to the conclusion of the contract.

Under the above contract, the Plaintiff could no longer proceed with the construction due to the occurrence of bankruptcy while performing the said new construction work. On November 30, 2005, the Plaintiff agreed to determine the amount of progress payment up to the time of the waiver of the said construction work and to settle the settlement of accounts with the content that the said construction is paid as an apartment.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 3 to 8, witness F's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

A. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s judgment on the cause of the claim was delivered in cash and in check to the Defendant from December 30, 2004 to January 1, 2005, and the Defendant also recognized that the above amount was borrowed from the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the above borrowed amount of KRW 300 million and interest or delay damages thereon.

(B) The Defendant alleged that the above KRW 300 million was the money in the name of the payment of the moving expenses to the owner of the model house site, but it appears only as an assertion about its use, and it does not seem to deny the character of the borrowed money.

The defendant's argument as to the defendant's argument is that the plaintiff is liable for the above borrowed money by reducing KRW 300 million out of the amount of the basic construction part of the plaintiff paid to B when the plaintiff gives up the contract.