1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The fact that the Plaintiff transferred KRW 70 million on August 3, 2015 to the Nonghyup Bank account in the name of the Defendant (hereinafter “instant account”) and KRW 30 million on January 4, 2016 does not conflict between the parties.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff, along with the Defendant, lent a total of KRW 100 million to the Defendant via the instant account upon the request for the loan of the opening of the hospital C, which established the hospital (hereinafter “instant loan”). Since the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the said loan of KRW 100 million and the damages for delay thereof, it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant borrowed the said money from the Plaintiff on the sole basis of the remittance through the instant account, and there is no other evidence to support this otherwise, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff asserts that, following the determination of the nominal lender’s liability, even if the borrower of the instant loan is not the Defendant, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the instant loan to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 24 of the Commercial Act, since the Plaintiff loaned the name to C and opened the hospital in the name of the Defendant, and used the instant loan as funds for opening the hospital.

In other words, the following circumstances recognized by the testimony of the witness Eul, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the following circumstances, namely, the E-gu E-gu in Seongbuk-si, Sungnam-si, but, in fact, C transferred the name of the defendant to a clinic specialized in urology by lending the defendant's credit to the defendant, and the defendant who was the defendant at the time of urology and treatment at the above hospital to the extent that he was paid the remuneration according to the number of medical treatment reported at the above hospital No. 2 at the time of the death, the plaintiff was making monetary transactions between C and C, and the plaintiff was liable for the repayment of the loan of this case to the defendant after C's death.