1. The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 47,508,613 and KRW 25,519,453 among them.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B Religious Organizations (hereinafter “Defendant Religious Group”) is affiliated with Defendant B, a non-corporate body, which was a non-corporate body created in 1946, as an incorporated association.

Defendant Incorporated Association C (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Incorporated Association”) is an affiliated organization of Plaintiff Religious Group, and is an incorporated association established on November 18, 191 for the purpose of the maintenance and management of the Korea Development Bank’s facilities and the members belonging to Defendant Religious Group, the Korean Development Bank’s Korean Development Bank Act, education, Buddhist academic research, social welfare, etc.

B. The Defendants filed a lawsuit claiming unjust enrichment (Seoul Northern District Court 2015Gahap26904) against the Plaintiff, on October 20, 2016, on the ground that “The Plaintiff did not work as the business affairs of the Defendants, and did not use the expenses for the Defendants, so the said judgment became final and conclusive upon dismissal of the judgment, which was rendered on March 5, 2005 to October 26, 2014, and 21,648,655 won from around 207 to around 2008.”

(1) Article 8 of the General Secretary Act only stipulates that "the staff below the Director General shall be appointed by the Director General on the proposal of the competent Director, and there is no particular provision on the qualifications."

E (F) From around 2001 to October 2015, which had worked as the chief secretary of the Defendant Religious Group, was investigated as a witness by the prosecutor’s office, and he recommended the Plaintiff as the chief secretary of the Defendant Religious Group, and the network G G, which had been the chief director of the Defendant Religious Group and the representative director of the Defendant Religious Group, appointed the Plaintiff as the chief secretary.

② Although there is no provision defining the general secretary general under the provisions of Defendant Religious Group, H and I worked as secretary before the Plaintiff, and I, who was the former secretary at the time when the Plaintiff was appointed as secretary, was old and new.