1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On March 29, 2013, B entered into a subcontract (hereinafter “instant subcontract”) with respect to the instant construction work, i.e., concrete sheet, steel-frame, and steel-frameing construction work, which are KRW 1,133,840,000, with the land-based construction work located in Chungcheongnam-gun and five parcels of land (hereinafter “instant construction work”). On April 2, 2013, C entered into a subcontract (hereinafter “instant subcontract”) with the Plaintiff on a contract price of KRW 590,00,000 as to the instant construction work.

On July 2013, the Plaintiff completed construction works under the instant subcontract agreement.

B. Meanwhile, B received a loan from the Seocho Agricultural Cooperative Federation for the subsidies for the project for modernization of livestock facilities (hereinafter “policy funds”) and paid the instant construction cost. B received KRW 58,000,000 from the Seobu Agricultural Cooperative on July 10, 2013 as the first policy funds from the Seobu Agricultural Cooperative, and C transferred KRW 550,000,000 out of the said policy funds to the Plaintiff’s account. On the same day, C transferred KRW 50,000 to the Plaintiff’s account.

In addition, upon the request of B, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 90,000,000 out of the above KRW 550,000,000 to the Defendant’s account on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 8, purport of whole pleading

2. Determination:

A. Upon receipt of the Plaintiff’s assertion B’s second policy fund loan, C had C immediately returned KRW 90,000,000 that the Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant on July 10, 2013, and C had transferred KRW 90,000 to the Defendant’s account. B did not refund KRW 76,00,000 with the second policy fund on August 13, 2013, and KRW 260,832,000 with the third policy fund on November 19, 2013, notwithstanding the fact that the Plaintiff received each loan, the Plaintiff did not return KRW 90,00,000 that the Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant.

Therefore, even though there is no legal relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, the above KRW 90,000 shall be returned to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment, since the plaintiff transferred the above KRW 90,000 to the defendant's account by deception B, there is no right to hold the above KRW 90,000,000.

(b).