1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Around November 3, 1997, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion entered into a construction contract with the Defendant on the construction work that the Plaintiff newly constructs a commercial building of the third floor size on both the land of Suwon-si C and D, Suwon-si, and the construction work that newly constructs a building of the second floor size on the land of E (hereinafter “the construction work of this case”) with the construction cost of KRW 620,000,000,000 (hereinafter “the construction contract of this case”).

However, in collusion with F, etc., the Plaintiff filed a false claim for the excessive amount of construction cost, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 647,017,197 exceeding KRW 27,058,197,00,000,000 to the Defendant. Since the above excessive amount was paid without any legal ground, the Defendant is obligated to return the above excessive amount to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

2. In full view of the purport of the argument in each statement in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant in collusion with F to seek damages by alleging that the defendant acquired money as a construction price from the plaintiff, but was ruled against the court of first instance, and the court of second instance changed the cause of the claim in exchange for the claim against the defendant among the construction price paid under the construction contract of this case, which was the amount cited in the lawsuit (U.S. District Court 2004Gahap776) brought against the plaintiff among the construction price paid under the construction contract of this case, on the ground that the plaintiff made unjust enrichment equivalent to KRW 184,426,841, which was the amount cited in the lawsuit (U.S. District Court 2012Da8522, Suwon District Court 2012Na8522, Seoul High Court 208Da90827, 3:130), and the plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff paid the construction price to the defendant under the construction contract of this case.