2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. The defendant is running a damage compensation mutual aid project in accordance with Article 67 of the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act in order to guarantee the liability for damages to the delegated person of affiliated certified judicial scrivener. B is a member of the damage compensation mutual aid association operated by the defendant

C served as the head of a certified judicial scrivener office operated by B as a partner of B.

B. C received KRW 70 million from the Plaintiff on March 17, 2014, and received a written confirmation stating that “I will keep and confirm the ownership transfer of the real estate D (hereinafter “instant real estate”). I will return the real estate before the registration by March 26, 2014 (hereinafter “instant written confirmation”) in his/her own name and B and deliver it to the Plaintiff.”

C. However, until March 26, 2014, the instant real estate was not registered, and C returned KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff on June 11, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. On March 17, 2014, the Plaintiff delegated B’s agent C with the registration of ownership transfer in the name of E on the instant real estate and the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage in the name of the Plaintiff, and paid KRW 70 million to C as the expenses for registration or the expenses for the handling of delegated affairs.

However, since the registration of ownership transfer and the registration of establishment of mortgage on the above real estate was not made, and the amount of KRW 60 million out of the above money was not returned, B is obligated to pay KRW 60 million to the Plaintiff by proxy act of C.

(b) did not have the authority to act on behalf of C.

Even if at the time of the preparation of the instant confirmation document, B had expressed the intent of granting the power of representation to the Plaintiff, and thus, B bears the responsibility for the return of the said money as an expression agent under Article 125

C. B: (a) July 24, 2014, the instant case to the Plaintiff by August 24, 2014.