대여금
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The plaintiff's defendant B added at the trial of the court.
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments as to the plaintiff's assertion added in the court of first instance. Thus, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff was delivered the loan of this case because it belongs to C's use network and the participation of Defendant B. The above acts of Defendant C and Defendant B constitute a tort against the plaintiff. Thus, Defendant B and the plaintiff should pay the loan of this case as compensation for damages caused by the tort and the damages for delay.
B) Defendant B used the instant loan that the Plaintiff remitted to Defendant B’s account for the purpose of delivering it to C for personal purposes without delivering it to C. This constitutes embezzlement against the Plaintiff, and thus Defendant B is obligated to return unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff and pay the instant loan and its delay damages to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment. C) The Plaintiff expressed its intent to cancel the instant loan agreement. Since the contract was cancelled, Defendant B is obligated to return the instant loan and its delay damages to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.
2. The gist of the conjunctive assertion is that the loan in this case should be delivered to the defendant A, and the defendant A has a claim for return of unjust enrichment with respect to the loan in this case against the defendant A. Since the plaintiff has a claim for unjust enrichment with respect to the loan in this case against the defendant A, the defendant A is currently insolvent, and the defendant was not exercising the above right with respect to the defendant B, the plaintiff has the claim for unjust enrichment with respect to the loan in this case against the defendant A as the preserved claim and the claim for return of unjust enrichment with respect to the defendant A.