In addition, the plaintiff added the claim for return of unjust enrichment to this court.

Therefore, the scope of this Court's adjudication is the Plaintiff's loan claim and unjust enrichment claim.

Basic Facts

(1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a partnership business agreement around August 199, and operated “D Pungk”, a motor vehicle repair and maintenance business entity, in the net city C.

(2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to terminate the instant partnership agreement around March 10, 2009.

(3) The Plaintiff paid to the Defendant KRW 30 million on March 4, 2009, KRW 20 million on March 10, 2009, KRW 18 million on April 7, 2009, and KRW 68 million on April 7, 2009.

(2) Of the above money, the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 30 million to the Defendant on March 4, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as “instant KRW 30 million”) / [based on recognition] without dispute, the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 40 million to the Defendant when terminating the instant partnership agreement with the Defendant, as well as to pay the Defendant the settlement amount of KRW 40 million.

In addition, in addition, the Plaintiff decided to lend KRW 30 million to the Defendant with the maturity of one year, separately from the above settlement amount, and paid KRW 30 million in this case.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 30 million with the return of the borrowed amount and damages for delay.

If the 30 million won claim as to the conjunctive claim is not the loan or the settlement money following the termination of the agreement on the business of this case, the defendant received it without any legal ground.

Therefore, the defendant returned unjust enrichment to the plaintiff 3.