횡령금
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is that the defendant's defense added in the trial of the court of first instance is stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition of the following determination as to the defendant's defense added in the trial of the court of first instance. Thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance
2. The defendant's defense added in the trial at the court below did not return 10,00 shares E owned by the defendant after lending them to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant's defense that the plaintiff offsets the plaintiff's claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the purchase price of shares E with the claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the above purchase price of shares against the plaintiff's claim for the deposit money of this case. However, it is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant had a claim for return of unjust enrichment with the above contents just
Therefore, the defendant's defense is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims shall be dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.