1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The status of the parties is a company aimed at real estate development and lease business, and the Defendant is the representative director of the Plaintiff from May 1, 2015 to June 27, 2018, who is in charge of the Plaintiff’s land purchase and funding business.

B. From July 29, 2016 to April 19, 2018, the Defendant collected the following money from the Plaintiff’s account under the pretext of a half of the provisional deposit (or return; hereinafter the same shall apply).

(hereinafter “instant withdrawn amount”). On July 29, 2016, 700,000,000, 200 on the same date and time, or on July 29, 2016, 2016, 350,000,000 on August 5, 2016, 30,000 on August 5, 2016, 30,000 on 50,000 on 50,000 on 50,00 on 50,00 on 50,00 on 20,00 on 10,000 on 6, 200,00 on 20,00 on 7, 200,00 on 7, 200,000 on 7, 200,00 on 7, 200, 70,005 on 16, 2018

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Of the money deposited by the Defendant in the Plaintiff’s account as a provisional deposit, most of the money invested from or borrowed from a customer.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, after treating the case as a provisional payment to the Plaintiff, voluntarily consumed the case by withdrawing the amount under the pretext of half of the provisional payment. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to return the amount equivalent to the amount of the instant case to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks payment of KRW 1 billion, which is a part of the withdrawn amount of this case, to the Defendant first.

B. 1) In a lawsuit seeking restitution of unjust enrichment, the burden of proof as to the fact that the general elements for establishing unjust enrichment occurred without any legal cause is borne by the claimant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da72786, May 29, 2008). Therefore, as alleged by the Plaintiff, the Defendant is unreasonable.