1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On August 24, 2011, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 49,000,00 (hereinafter “instant deposit amount”) in the virtual transaction account (hereinafter “instant account”) against E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) from the second title to the date of August 24, 201, and subsequently paid the said deposit amount on behalf of D’s E. As such, the Defendant asserts that he/she is obligated to return the said unjust enrichment and delay damages.

First of all, we examine whether the Plaintiff deposited the instant account by mistake without any cause, and examine the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively considering the purport of the entire argument in the statement in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, namely, ① deposit of the said money with the account in the order of F to deposit KRW 49,00,00 in the instant account from E at the time of purchasing the gift set; ② the Plaintiff used the said deposit money to repay F’s debt to F, and failed to provide the Plaintiff with the authorization of the gift set; ③ the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against E to return or compensate for the instant deposit amount (Seoul Southern District Court 2014Da2017492), but the Plaintiff was denied the employer’s liability on the ground that it was not in violation of ordinary transaction methods, ④ the Plaintiff’s act of performing the business of employees, ④ the Plaintiff asserted that the said money was useful in the instant lawsuit.

According to the above facts, the Plaintiff deposited the instant account not by mistake but by F’s instructions. Thus, F was useful to pay the said deposit amount to D, unlike the Plaintiff’s intent.