A. On May 2015, the Defendant: (a) sent by the Defendant’s handphones around the end of 2015, the Defendant sought for the portion of the office room in order to help the Defendant deposit business of the corporate company’s non-financing; (b) the 4-day license agreement “payment of KRW 1,00,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000) passed around that time; (c) the Defendant opened a passbook in order to manage the funds

B. At that time, the Defendant opened the C’s above proposal and received a cash card under the Defendant’s name, and then laid down his means of access, such as passbook, cash card, password, etc., to the bearers.

C. On June 4, 2015, on the part of 09:30 on the part of 09:30, the person under whose name the Plaintiff had the Plaintiff go by telephone and let the Plaintiff go to the branch of the nearest KRB Industrial Bank. Accordingly, at around 11:35 minutes of the same day, the Plaintiff arrived at the Gwangju branch of the Gwangju Mine-gu Gwangju Mine-gu, Gwangju, the above person under whose name the person under whose name the name the Plaintiff was not paid KRW 34 million by deceiving the Plaintiff, thereby inducing the Plaintiff to deposit the amount of KRW 34 million into the above CB bank account under the name of the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute between the parties, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 3, and the purport of the body before pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion is selectively asserted as follows. A.

The Defendant, without any legal cause, received KRW 34 million from the Plaintiff to his own account without any legal ground due to the said act of deception by the said person, and acquired the said money’s deposit claim. Accordingly, the Plaintiff suffered a loss equivalent to the said amount, and the Defendant is obligated to return the said money to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. Although the Defendant could have predicted that the means of access, such as one’s account, password, cash card, etc., were to be used for the commission of the phishing, the Defendant transferred the said means of access by contact with the phishing staff, and the person in default of name was the means of access, etc. that the Defendant received from the Defendant.