1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff received a loan from Han Bank Co., Ltd. on March 6, 2004 and remitted KRW 200 million to the Defendant on March 8, 2004.

B. Around May 22, 2005, the Defendant paid KRW 150 million to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion;

A. The plaintiff's assertion that KRW 200 million paid by the plaintiff to the defendant was "to distribute profits by selling in lots or leasing, and if the sale in lots or leasing is difficult, the bank will return the money with the interest attached to the owner after the completion of the building, and the interest rate is one year from the due date for payment and the interest rate is the bank. Since the plaintiff paid KRW 150 million from the defendant, the defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 50 million and the delay damages to the plaintiff. Even if not, until the transfer of the shares in the plaintiff's name on May 22, 2006, the defendant agreed to "to preserve the principal" to the plaintiff, the defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 50 million and the delay damages to the plaintiff.

B. The defendant's assertion does not borrow money from the plaintiff, but the defendant purchased land and decided to operate a business to build a new building and sell the building in partnership with the plaintiff's investment amount of KRW 200 million.

While the Defendant purchased land with a loan of KRW 1.4 billion and constructed a new building but became aware of sale, around May 2005, the Defendant returned KRW 1.5 million to the Plaintiff due to the withdrawal from the above partnership relationship, and paid KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff with the agreement to pay the registration fee, and the Defendant paid KRW 1.5 million to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant does not have the money to be paid to the plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is that the Plaintiff lent KRW 200 million to the Defendant at the maturity of one year and interest rate, or that the Defendant agreed on May 22, 2006 to return KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff.