1. The plaintiff's primary claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The Plaintiff, Defendant D’s 6,000,000 won, and Defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 16, 2013, at around 10:00, the Plaintiff called “the Plaintiff’s bank transaction information that was exposed to the fraud and thus, should prevent information leakage by putting the Plaintiff’s bank transaction information out of security level.” Accordingly, the Plaintiff was informed of the Plaintiff’s personal information, such as the Plaintiff’s bank number, account number, security card number, and account password.

B. From December 17, 2013 to the 18th day of the same month, the name-unexploitist transferred the total amount of KRW 89,800,000 to the Plaintiff’s bank account (L) and the new bank account (M) using the Plaintiff’s personal information to each of the Defendants’ respective deposit accounts as shown in the corresponding sheet as shown in the corresponding sheet, and withdrawn all of them.

(2) The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the presumption of confession (see Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act). The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the presumption of confession (see Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act). The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the presumption of confession (see Article 150(3) and (4).

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. As a result of the Defendant’s primary claim (the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment) of this case, the Defendants obtained benefits equivalent to the money indicated in the “amount” column in the separate sheet without any legal cause, and the Plaintiff suffered losses equivalent to the respective amount, and thus, the Defendants should return the unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff.

B. Preliminary claim (joint tort liability) The Defendants, even though they did not actively participate in the instant Bophishing crime, committed a tort that facilitates the instant Bophishing crime against the Plaintiff by transferring their passbooks, etc. to a person under whose name they could have been able to have been used in the criminal act, and thus, committed a tort that facilitates the instant Bophishing crime against the Plaintiff by transferring them to a person under whose name the passbooks could have been used in the criminal act. Therefore