1. Defendant B’s KRW 80,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from January 12, 2008 to March 5, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The fact that the Plaintiff lent KRW 300 million to Defendant B on September 11, 2007 is without dispute between the parties, and that the Plaintiff received reimbursement of KRW 220 million among them is the Plaintiff. As Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay at each rate of 5% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act from January 12, 2008 to March 5, 2015, the delivery date of the copy of the complaint in this case, as the Plaintiff seeks, from January 12, 2008, and from March 5, 2015, the delivery date of the copy of the complaint in this case.

B. The plaintiff alleged that he lent KRW 300 million to the defendant C. Thus, the plaintiff transferred KRW 290 million to the defendant's Han Bank account (Account Number D) on September 1, 2007 according to the each of the evidence Nos. 2 and 2, and around 2007, the plaintiff filed a complaint against the defendant C with the purport that the plaintiff acquired KRW 290 million from the plaintiff in collusion with the defendant Eul, but the head of Suwon District Public Prosecutor's Office of Sung-nam District Public Prosecutor's Office did not have any evidence to acknowledge that the defendant C conspired with the defendant Eul on July 15, 2014. The above facts are insufficient to acknowledge that the plaintiff lent KRW 300 million to the defendant Eul, and there is no evidence to support that the plaintiff lent it to the defendant C.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant C is without merit.

2. If so, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B of this case is justified, and the claim against the defendant C is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.