1. The part concerning the counterclaim in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant-Counterclaim plaintiff's counterclaim is dismissed.

2...

1. Determination on the main claim

A. Although the Defendant did not have worked or provided labor at the Plaintiff Company, the fact that the Defendant received KRW 1,364,410 through KRW 1,380,460 (hereinafter “the instant benefits”) for the benefit of the Plaintiff at least 35 times from February 7, 2013 to February 4, 2016 is either a dispute between the parties, or that the Defendant did not dispute between the parties, or that the Defendant received KRW 49,457,520 (hereinafter “the instant benefits”) for the benefit of the Plaintiff, taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings in the evidence No. 3 (including the serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply).

B. (1) The parties’ assertion (1) paid KRW 49,457,520 to the Defendant who was in charge of the Plaintiff’s representative director by March 24, 2016, who did not work or provide labor in the Plaintiff Company while taking full charge of the Plaintiff’s business of managing and executing the Plaintiff’s funds. As such, the Defendant is obligated to return the said money and delay damages to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

(2) Around April 2, 2010 to May 10, 2013, a sum of KRW 425,000,000 was leased to the Plaintiff directly or through C by the representative director at the time of the Plaintiff.

The defendant has received interest on the above loan, and it is a matter of no relation with the defendant that the plaintiff received interest or delay damages from the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff made payment from February 2013 to the method of paying benefits in consideration of the company's cost management, etc.

C. (1) Article 741 of the Civil Act provides that “A person who gains a benefit from another person’s property or service without any legal cause and thereby causes a loss to another person shall return such benefit.”

In the case of so-called unjust enrichment for which one of the parties has paid a certain amount of benefit according to his own will and then claims the return on the grounds that the benefit is not a legal ground, the burden of proving that there is no legal ground.