1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. On April 28, 2017, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 8 million (hereinafter “instant deposit amount”) in the Defendant bank account in the name of the gold farm (hereinafter “instant account”).

B. On May 15, 2017, an employee A and B of the Geum Litrate prepared and delivered a confirmation document stating that “the Plaintiff confirms the fact that the Plaintiff transferred the goods to the instant account of Geum Litrate, not the Han Litrate’s account, due to the mistake of the Plaintiff employees, in the process of paying the goods to Han Litrate, around April 2017 (hereinafter “instant confirmation document”).

C. The plaintiff asserts that he had a claim for the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the amount entered in the instant case against the gold set, and sought a payment of deposit claim equivalent to the amount entered in the instant case against the defendant of the gold set in subrogation of the gold set.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, 7, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts in the determination on the cause of the claim, since the Plaintiff acquired deposit claims equivalent to KRW 8 million from the Plaintiff’s transfer to the instant account by mistake to the Defendant, the gold set has the obligation to return this claim to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment, and according to the purport of the entire statement and arguments in Eul and Eul’s evidence (including the number of serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), it is recognized that, according to the whole purport of each statement and argument in Eul’s evidence, Korea Capital Co., Ltd.’s deposit claims against the Defendant on February 21, 2017, two months before the transfer of the amount of the instant deposit claims to the Defendant on February 21, 2017, which was about two months before the transfer of the amount of the instant deposit claims, it is recognized that the gold Co., Ltd lost the benefit of the time limit for the Defendant’s obligations to the Defendant (see Article 7 of the Basic Terms and Conditions for Credit Transactions among attached materials).

Therefore, the defendant does not have any special circumstances.