A. On August 11, 201, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s account (hereinafter “instant money”).

(b) D Farming Partnership (formerly changed: G Farming Partnership) is an incorporated farming association established for the purpose of processing and selling agricultural and forest products food.

C. On March 10, 2011, the Defendant was appointed as the representative director of the D Agricultural Partnership. On February 26, 2012, the Plaintiff was appointed as the representative director of the said Agricultural Partnership on behalf of the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. Plaintiff 1) The Plaintiff is the Co-Defendant C of the first instance trial (hereinafter “C”).

(2) On August 11, 201, under the joint and several guarantee, the Defendant lent the instant money to the Defendant. Even if the fact of lending is not recognized, so long as the Defendant did not reveal the legal cause for receiving the instant money, the said money must be returned to unjust enrichment. 2) Even if lending or unjust enrichment is not recognized, the Defendant is liable to return the instant money, and thus, the Plaintiff is obligated to return KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff paid the instant money as the down payment to purchase K, L, and M land owned by the Defendant, but demanded the return of the said money on or around August 18, 201 through C, which was approved by the Defendant.

After that, in lieu of the return of the instant money, the Defendant transferred 50% of the shares of the Plaintiff’s association members and the representative director’s office owned by the Defendant, and thus, there is no obligation against the Plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. The obligation to return the instant monetary amount is insufficient to recognize that the instant monetary amount was either a loan or a payment to the Defendant without any legal cause only with the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it (the part in the Defendant’s production of the evidence No. 5).