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

A. The Plaintiff, while holding office as a police officer, retired on October 31, 2006. On November 8, 2006, the Plaintiff received a lump sum payment of KRW 132,863,380 from the Government Employees Pension Corporation to the Cbank account (D; hereinafter “C Bank account”) in the name of the Plaintiff from the Government Employees Pension Corporation, and received a remittance of KRW 152,042,52,520 in total from the amount of retirement pension to the C Bank account in the name of the Plaintiff.

B. On November 8, 2006, the details of the instant Cbank account were as follows.

09:00:07 Lump sum of 132,863, 380 132,864, 264, 264:00:08 retirement allowances 19,179, 140 152,04, 12:11:04, 93371, 4712, 4712, 12:3:52 Alternative Payment (E Bank A) 70,00,000, 112,471

C. On November 8, 2006, the details of transactions on the account in the name of the Plaintiff (F; hereinafter “the account in this case”) with respect to KRW 70 million remitted from the account in this case’s bank account are as follows.

The balance of deposits paid at the time of transaction 12:33:52 70,000,000 72,484,810 - revocation of deposit 12:44:39 -70,000 - 2,484,810 12:46:46:11 - 12,484,484,810 - 10,484,810

D. On Nov. 8, 2006, G Co., Ltd. issued six copies of a cashier’s check ( check number H-I) which issued each of 10 million won issued in the issuance place of the Plaintiff’s resident registration number on Nov. 12:35, 2006.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant check”) e.b. six copies of the said check.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against G on November 12, 2015 for the return of unjust enrichment on the ground that the Plaintiff did not receive the check of this case and did not receive KRW 60 million. However, the said court rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on June 13, 2017 on the ground that the check of this case was presented to the branch of the Defendant bank pan-dong, and that the check of this case was paid by G on November 17, 2006. The said judgment became final and conclusive on November 29, 2018, following the dismissal of appeal and the dismissal of appeal.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2-1 to 3.