1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff, from July 1, 200, pursuant to Article 39 of the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act and the Ministry of Health and Welfare’s guidance for welfare projects for disabled persons from July 1, 200, purchased LPG fuel for transportation by credit cards, debit cards, or credit cards or debit cards or debit cards of designated guardians of disabled persons, which are attached to the welfare card for disabled persons, prior to tax revenue. However, with respect to the tax revenue portion, the Plaintiff has implemented the policy on the reduction of the cost of purchasing cars used by disabled persons by preserving the amount of the tax revenue amount (hereinafter “instant support policy”).

B. The guidance on welfare programs for persons with disabilities is to suspend the LPG discount if a person to whom a guardian card for persons with disabilities is issued becomes a different household with persons with disabilities;

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Although the Defendant asserted by the Plaintiff was separated from the disabled persons B and the household that were protected, the Defendant received a discount amounting to KRW 1,706,330 from the Plaintiff on a total of 168 occasions from January 9, 2004 to August 8, 2007 by using the guardian card under the name of the Defendant for the disabled, and received a discount amounting to KRW 1,706,330.

The defendant is obligated to return the money to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in evidence Nos. 3, 6, and 9, the defendant can recognize the fact that the defendant obtained a discount of KRW 943,140,00 each from Nov. 3, 2004 to Nov. 16, 2004; and from Feb. 6, 2006 to Dec. 2, 2007, different from the households No. 103.

The plaintiff's assertion is justified within the scope of the above recognition.

Unless there exist special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the unjust enrichment of KRW 943,140, and damages for delay.

3. Judgment on the defendant's defense, etc.

A. The defendant's claim for return of unjust enrichment against the statute of limitations defense is assessed against the plaintiff.