1. The Defendant’s KRW 1,270,931,506 for the Plaintiff and its weight:

A. From November 20, 2018 to November 8, 2019, for KRW 1,100,000.

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a regional housing association established in accordance with the provisions of the Housing Act to implement the project of the regional housing association in Busanjin-gu C.

B. On November 11, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement on February 11, 2017 with the Defendant to lend KRW 1,700,000 to the Defendant (hereinafter “the loan agreement in this case”) with the highest interest rate under the Credit Business Act (which shall be applied as of November 2016, but shall be changed at the time of change in the interest rate): and pursuant to the loan agreement in this case, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 1,70,000,000 on November 20, 2016, and KRW 1,000,000,000 on November 15, 2016, and KRW 50,000,000 on November 16, 2016; and KRW 50,000,000,0000 on November 16, 2016.

C. At the time D, the head of the Defendant’s association, on behalf of the Defendant, did not undergo a resolution of the Defendant’s general meeting in concluding the instant loan for consumption on behalf of the Defendant. The instant loan for consumption was not included in the matters set forth in the budget of the Defendant’s general meeting.

On November 19, 2018, the Defendant repaid KRW 600,000 to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3 and Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 1,700,000 to the Defendant pursuant to the instant loan for consumption, and the said loan for consumption was null and void since the Defendant entered into a contract without going through a resolution of the union general meeting in violation of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, including the Housing Act, and the Defendant’s covenant. Thus, the Defendant would have obtained financial benefits equivalent to the above loan without any legal ground, and thereby, incurred loss to the Plaintiff equivalent to the same amount.

In addition, at the time of entering into the loan for consumption, the defendant is aware that the loan for consumption in this case is null and void, and thus constitutes a malicious beneficiary under Article 748 (2) of the Civil Act.

Therefore, the defendant's unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 1,700,000.