A. Indication of Claim: In order to preserve the right to claim damages against K, the Plaintiff sought a return of unjust enrichment on the money recorded in the separate sheet that K transferred to Defendant D without any legal cause.

(b) Grounds for recognition: Article 218 (1) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act (the judgment deemed as a confession);

2. Claim against the remaining Defendants

A. The facts of recognition 1) K was convicted of having committed occupational embezzlement and habitual gambling, such as transfer of the Plaintiff’s funds to Defendant E, C, F, G, I, and J’s account from October 2015 to May 2018, while managing the Plaintiff’s funds as the Plaintiff’s financial director (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2019Da1031, Aug. 21, 2020). K deposited each money as stated in the intent of the claim in the Defendants’ account under the Defendants’ name.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. Defendant E, F, G, I, and J are the primary causes of claim 1) Plaintiff’s assertion that the said Defendants are those who operate the Internet gambling site or refund the gambling fund to the foreign level gambling. As such, K knew that K embezzled the Plaintiff’s funds and provided his account in its name in gambling with the knowledge of gambling, thereby providing them with gambling activities, it shall be liable for damages as joint tortfeasor for the act of occupational embezzlement. 2) The fact that K remitted the Plaintiff’s funds to the above Defendants’ account in the name of the said Defendants, which was used as the deposit account in the Internet gambling site or the exchange account in the Internet gambling site.

However, such circumstance alone is difficult to view that the above Defendants, as the operator or the exchange manager of the Internet gambling site, provided their accounts in their names despite being aware of K’s occupational embezzlement, and there is evidence No. 8.