1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows: (a) the Defendant’s assertion to emphasize or add the following “3. Additional Judgment” is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for the addition of the following “3. Additional Decision”, and thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which is used or deleted, shall be as follows, and the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, from No. 7 to No. 11, "it is not appropriate to be invoked accordingly." Therefore, the repayment shall not become effective solely on the ground that there was such error in the above error to the plaintiff. However, upon acceptance of the request of the above certified judicial scrivener, the defendant returned the money deposited in this case to the plaintiff's national bank account, thereby cancelling the repayment of the defendant's obligation to the defendant to the deposited amount of this case deposited by the plaintiff and losing its validity.

3. Additional determination

A. The defendant's assertion that he remitted the money of this case to the plaintiff's national bank account was aware that the defendant's obligation to the credit guarantee fund was nonexistent and the defendant's obligation to return unjust enrichment to the plaintiff based on it was found to exist. Thus, this is based on the motive mistake and mistake as to the important part.

The Defendant’s above mistake is an error caused by the Plaintiff’s F judicial scrivener’s transmission to the Defendant by facsimile a certified copy of the copy of the instant land No. 2, and the provisional attachment registration to be cancelled for the registration of ownership transfer as to the instant land No. 2 is the Gyeonggi Credit Guarantee Foundation, and the said provisional attachment obligee was aware of it, and thus, the return was changed. Therefore, the Defendant’s declaration of remittance based on such mistake is revoked.

Even if so, it is not.