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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. On April 11, 2008, the Plaintiff, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, remitted 2.4 million won to the Defendant’s account in the name of the Defendant.

As a result, the defendant acquired profits equivalent to the above amount, while the plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to the same amount, the defendant shall return it to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. The defendant's assertion is merely delivered to C by receiving KRW 2.4 million from the plaintiff upon the request of C and transferring it to C's account, and there is no profit equivalent to the above amount.

2. Determination

A. Article 741 of the Civil Act provides that “A person who gains a benefit from another’s property or labor without any legal cause and thereby causes a loss to the other person shall return such benefit.”

The burden of proving that there is no legal ground in the case of the so-called unjust enrichment that one party claims the return of the benefits after having paid a certain amount of benefits according to his/her own will on the grounds that there is no legal ground.

In such cases, a person who seeks the return of unjust enrichment shall assert and prove, together with the existence of the fact causing the act of payment, that the cause has ceased to exist due to the extinguishment of the said cause due to invalidation, cancellation, cancellation, etc., and that in the same case as the so-called mistake remittance made on the ground that there was no ground that the act of payment was caused, he/she shall assert and prove the fact that

(See Supreme Court Decision 2017Da37324 Decided January 24, 2018). B.

According to Gap evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the plaintiff remitted 2.4 million won to the defendant's account on April 11, 2008.

However, the following circumstances are acknowledged by the purport of the entire pleadings as to whether the Plaintiff remitted the above 2.4 million won to the Defendant by mistake and whether the Defendant acquired it unfairly. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 10660, Jan. 1, 2000>