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

A. The plaintiff is a person who runs the business of transporting tin in the trade name B, and the defendant is a company that runs the business of manufacturing tin, mining development, mineral wholesale, and export and import business.

B. From January 1, 2005 to August 201, the Plaintiff entered into a contract between the Defendant and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract of carriage”) which transports the company at the present place or at the Incheon site, etc., in the middleyang, which is the location of the Defendant company, the Plaintiff entered into a contract between the Defendant and the Defendant to transport the company from January 1, 2005 to August 201.

C. In the instant transport contract, the unit cost of the transport cost was first set at KRW 14,00 per ton of the raw materials. From June 1, 2010, the unit cost of the transport cost was raised at KRW 14,800.

Meanwhile, in concluding the instant transport contract, the Plaintiff voluntarily proposed to increase the transport volume and agreed with the Defendant to refund (i.e., 500 won per ton of tin as business expenses) the amount of KRW 500 per ton of tin (hereinafter “instant agreement”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff paid KRW 25,053,461 to the Defendant as business expenses from December 8, 2004 to August 29, 201.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including additional numbers), Eul's testimony, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion threatened the Plaintiff to be unable to enter into the instant transport contract or unable to continue the contract unless the Defendant refund 500 won per ton of tin to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff followed the transport contract of tin, and made the instant agreement inevitable to continue the contract, and accordingly, paid KRW 25,053,461 in total to the Defendant as business subsidies from December 8, 2004 to August 29, 201.

However, since such a business subsidy was received from the plaintiff without any legal ground to receive it, it constitutes unjust enrichment. The defendant is obligated to return such unjust enrichment to the plaintiff.

(1)in the vicinity of the State;