1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant M 2,600,000 won, Defendant P 5,000,000 won, and each of them from October 26, 2012 to October 26, 2012.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 26, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained a phone call from a person who assumes the position of an employee, police officer, or employee of the Financial Supervisory Service, etc. of the telephone service provider; (b) “I would like to connect a police officer immediately because you did not automatically transfer the phone fee; and (c) “I would like to connect a police officer because there is the same problem in the automatic transfer passbook; (d) there is a risk that cash remaining in the current account would be withdrawn out of the account because all the Plaintiff’s passbooks are registered as an accident account; and (c) “I will open a new passbook and transfer cash,” and “I would know the password and the security card number of the passbook opened at the present time,” and “I would know Dozine through a mobile phone number that I would know.” (d) At this time, the Plaintiff terminated the existing passbook and sent the password and the security card number to another head of the Tong.

B. Accordingly, around October 26, 2012, from the passbook in the Plaintiff’s name to the passbook in the name of the Defendants, KRW 78,770,000 was transferred as follows.

Defendant transfer amount 1 B.6 million won 2 C. 6 million won 3D 5 million won 4.5 million won 5 million won 6 million won 6 G G 6.5 billion won 6 billion won 7 H 5.34 million won KRW 8.5 million in KRW 8.5 million in KRW 9 J 5.5 million in KRW 11 billion in KRW 11.5 million in KRW 12.5 million in KRW 13 N 5 million in KRW 1.5 million in KRW 15 million in KRW 1.5 million in KRW 1.5 million in KRW 2.6 million in case of KRW 1.5 million in case of transfer by the Defendant

C. The Defendants transferred passbooks, cash cards, etc. related to the instant case to a name-oriented person, and were subject to suspension of indictment or suspension of indictment due to the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act.

[Ground of recognition] The non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the result of the order to submit financial transaction information to the Agricultural Cooperatives Federation of this Court, the result of inquiry into the original branch office of the Chuncheon District Prosecutors' Office, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. According to the evidence in the judgment on the claim against Defendant M, it is recognized that the Plaintiff did not withdraw KRW 2.6 million that the Plaintiff remitted to the account of Defendant M and remains as it remains. As such, Defendant M.