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

A. After the divorce around 2007, the Plaintiff, who was living alone, was living together with Defendant C on the premise of marriage with D, which was known as the introduction of Defendant C.

B. The Plaintiff left the management of all its passbooks, such as the benefit passbook, to D.

C. D, along with the Plaintiff, used it as a deposit for the dwelling of the Plaintiff, and acquired money by deceiving the Plaintiff from January 30, 2014 to Defendant B, who is his/her dependent, by remitting KRW 42 million to the said Defendant.

D In addition, around October 3, 2015, the Plaintiff transferred 30 million won out of the insurance money transferred from an insurance company after receiving a diagnosis of leuk blood disease to Defendant C and embezzled it. D.

Defendant B, in collaboration with D, acquired or embezzled the above KRW 42 million, or aided or embezzled by deception or embezzlement of D.

Even if it is not so, Defendant B acquired the money embezzled by Defendant D with bad faith or gross negligence, and thus, Defendant B is the unjust enrichment that Defendant B received.

Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 42 million and damages for delay due to tort or unjust enrichment.

E. Defendant C actively participated in, or aided and abetted D’s embezzlement of KRW 30 million.

Even if it is not so, Defendant C acquired the money embezzled by Defendant D with bad faith or gross negligence, and thus, Defendant C is the unjust enrichment that Defendant C received.

Therefore, Defendant C is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of damages for tort or the amount of damages for delay, which is KRW 30 million, and the amount of damages for delay.

2. Among the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, each statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 9, and 13 cannot be a sufficient evidence to acknowledge the fact of defraudation or embezzlement by means of a medical certificate or a written confirmation of entry and discharge or a financial transaction with the Plaintiff.

Meanwhile, according to the evidence Nos. 4-1 and 3, the Plaintiff is suspected of embezzlement against D and Defendant C.