1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion that while running the business with the trade name of "D", the plaintiff was requested to lend money for the business of paying value-added tax to "D" and lent the total sum of KRW 25,000,000 to "E" account on September 17, 2013 and October 15, 2013. Since the defendant subsequently takes over the above "D" business from "E and operates the same trade name, the defendant asserts that the defendant is liable for the repayment of the debt due to the business of "D" as the mutual bound business transferee under Article 42 (1) of the Commercial Act.

2. Determination: (a) Article 42(1) of the Commercial Act provides that where a transferee continues to use a transferor’s trade name, a transferee is also liable for the debt of a third party arising from the transferor’s business. In this case, debt arising from the transferor’s business operations refers to the debt arising from the transferor’s business activities. In full view of the entries and the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence No. 1-2, No. 1-2, No. 3, and No. 1-2, the Plaintiff transferred money from the Plaintiff’s account of “C” operated by the Plaintiff to E’s account of E (D) from September 17, 2013; (b) KRW 5,00,000,000 on October 15, 2013; and (c) thereafter, E transferred money from the Plaintiff’s account of E (D) to the Defendant, who is the south of the Plaintiff’s business place and all of its business operations to transfer money to the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s account of E (i.e.

Such facts alone cannot be readily concluded as a monetary loan due to business activities, and the plaintiff can prove that it is a business loan.