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. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a multi-level distributor with the purpose of manufacturing and wholesale and retailing medical devices, cosmetics, food, health auxiliary food, etc.

After entering into a membership contract with the Plaintiff on August 31, 2009, the Defendant sold the Plaintiff’s goods or recruited subordinate members by May 19, 2015, and received allowances from the Plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff’s multi-level marketing salesperson structure consists of eight stages, such as members, First Clas, SCs, Pearl Clas, GCs, DIAs, PD (Prime Dmon), WBbes, etc. The Defendant was the second class PD.

On the other hand, the paid allowances were recovered when the subscription for the purchase of goods was withdrawn within three months.

C. On March 25, 2015, according to the Defendant’s grade, the Plaintiff KRW 3,175,929, and the same year.

4. A total of KRW 7,724,138, including KRW 4,548,209, was paid as bonuses to the Defendant.

From May 8, 2015 to July 22, 2015, the Defendant withdrawn an offer to purchase goods and returned goods to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Defendant’s bonus to be returned to the Plaintiff is the total amount of KRW 4,534,545 ( KRW 1,347,235 in February 1, 2015 plus KRW 3,342,040 in March 3, 2015 plus KRW 4,689,275 minus the amount of KRW 154,730 in March 3, 2015).

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, the Plaintiff suffered losses equivalent to the amount of bonuses reduced as a result of the Defendant’s withdrawal of subscription from May 8, 2015 to July 22, 2015. The Defendant obtained unjust enrichment equivalent to the same amount, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to return it to the Plaintiff.

In this regard, the defendant accepted the defendant's illegal business act, and accordingly, the plaintiff suffered losses due to the suspension of business and the bankruptcy, and therefore, the plaintiff's claim for return of unjust enrichment to the defendant is unreasonable, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it.