2. The costs of the lawsuit after filing the appeal.

The defendant and the co-defendant B did not appeal against this, and the plaintiff appealed only to the claim for return of unjust enrichment against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance, and the court of first instance shall judge in that part only.

2. Status of parties and factual relations related to the sale of commercial buildings;

A. On April 2008, the Defendant acquired the entire business rights, such as the right to implement the new construction of I apartment and commercial buildings on the ground, such as Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, H, etc. (hereinafter “G”), from Company G (hereinafter “G”) operated by E and F (hereinafter “instant business rights”).

B. Around April 2008, the Plaintiff: (a) purchased I’s 119, 139, and 140 commercial buildings (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant commercial building; and (b) respectively; (c) and (d) received a total of KRW 290,310,000 (provisionally referred to as KRW 119,127,200,000 + KRW 139,139 + + KRW 140,79,500 + KRW 140,000 + KRW 140,000 + KRW 140,000; and (d) received a receipt on January 16, 2008 under the name of the Defendant, Korea Asset Trust Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Korea Asset Trust”); and (d) thereafter, (e) received the Plaintiff’s 119,139,000 won and KRW 134,1450,000 won in the name of the Plaintiff.

C. The Defendant’s representative director B (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Defendant’s representative director”) received a loan from G due to lack of 13.2 billion won at the time of acquiring the instant business right from G, and the loan was excessive without any specific property around April 201.