A. The defendant is the chief director of the Incorporated Foundation B, and the Incorporated Foundation B is a non-profit incorporated foundation established for the purpose of scholarship business.

B. The Defendant is not a medical institution that can receive medical care benefit costs under the Medical Service Act because the medical institution established in the name of an incorporated foundation B, not a medical person, is not a medical institution.

C. Nevertheless, the Defendant established C Council members, D Council members, and E Council members, employed patients to treat patients, and claimed for medical care costs against the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Plaintiff paid the medical care costs as indicated below to the deposit account in the name of B, a foundation managed by the Defendant.

On September 1, 2007, to March 31, 2012, C Council members were established around April 16, 2002, but only the part of which the extinctive prescription has not been completed, was written as the period of medical treatment.

987,661,640 D Council members on April 20, 2012 from April 1, 2007 to April 1, 2012, 2084, 305, 950 E Council members on May 18, 2012 to April 120, 2013, totaling 2,192,87,280,780

D. The defendant was prosecuted for violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) with respect to the above fraud of medical care benefit costs, and was convicted, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 28, 2018.

The Seoul High Court (Seoul High Court 2017No841, 2634, Supreme Court 2017Do21641), Supreme Court 2017Do21641)

2. The plaintiff's claim

A. Due to the Defendant’s deception of tort damages, the Plaintiff suffered losses from paying medical care benefit costs that the Plaintiff is not obligated to pay.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by the above tort pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act.

B. The Plaintiff filed a claim for restitution of unjust enrichment without any legal ground.