Therefore, around the other hand, the Plaintiff was mistaken for the Defendants as the husband and wife, and Defendant C, known as the bad credit standing, was aware of the Plaintiff as Defendant B because he was engaged in soliciting the fraternity, and thus, Defendant B was obligated to pay the balance of the said fraternity amount (=50,000 won - KRW 59,350,700 - KRW 12,700,000) in accordance with Articles 125 and 126 of the Civil Act, which are the provision on the liability of expression representation, to the Plaintiff.

Preliminaryly, the Defendants, jointly by deceiving the Plaintiff and by deceiving the Plaintiff, and even if not, the Defendants committed a breach of trust by using the money for another purpose due to a change in circumstances after receiving the guidance money from the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendants jointly have a duty to compensate for KRW 46,650,00, which is the damage suffered by the Plaintiff.

2. Determination

A. (i) First, the primary and conjunctive claims against Defendant B are as follows: (i) whether Defendant B is in the position of care; (ii) whether Defendant B is in the position of care; (iii) whether the written evidence Nos. 1 and 3 are written in the evidence Nos. 1 and 3; and (iv) the Plaintiff et al. filed a complaint with the investigative agency against Defendant B as fraud; (iv) on December 29, 2015, the Plaintiff et al. filed a non-prosecution disposition against Defendant B on the ground that there was no evidence showing that he/she participated in the management of the limits organized by Defendant C with respect to fraud; (v) accordingly, Defendant B was convicted of a fine of KRW 1,500,000 on the ground that he/she transferred his/her passbook, etc. to Defendant C on November 2012; and (v) Defendant B was convicted of a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act