부당이득금
1. Plaintiff 1, among the part against the conjunctive Defendant C in the judgment of the court of first instance, falls under the following amount.
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning the claim against the primary defendant is as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination as to the claim against the conjunctive Defendants
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The preliminary defendants conspired with the plaintiff to be punished for embezzlement of KRW 6,813,181,984 of the principal defendant's school expenses, and they borrowed money from the plaintiff for school operation expenses to appropriate for embezzlement of the above school expenses and deposited money into the principal defendant's account. Therefore, the preliminary defendants are jointly and severally liable for the plaintiff to pay KRW 640,000,000 which was unpaid out of the loan of this case. Even if unjust enrichment is not acknowledged because the plaintiff lent money at the plaintiff's request, the preliminary defendants borrowed money from the plaintiff to meet the principal defendant's school expenses embezzled, so the preliminary defendants are jointly and severally liable for the plaintiff to pay KRW 640,00,000,000 to the principal defendant's school expenses.
3) Preliminary Defendant D had a seal imprint and a certificate of seal imprint at the request of Preliminary Defendant E, and the Preliminary Defendant D used this in order that the Preliminary Defendant E forged and forged A’s certificate No. 15-2, and thus, it cannot be used as evidence. Even if the Preliminary Defendant D could have borrowed money from the Preliminary Defendant D, it cannot be used as evidence. < Amended by Act No. 9401, Mar. 20, 2009>