The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the part of the judgment of the first instance, except for adding the following judgments, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant unjust enrichment of KRW 30,000,000,00, which is subject to further determination, is examined as to whether the defendant gains a substantial benefit.

The unjust enrichment system imposes an obligation of return on the benefiting party based on the principle of equity justice in cases where the benefiting of the benefiting party does not have a legal cause, and if the benefiting party does not actually belong to the benefiting party, the obligation of return cannot be

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da37325, 37332, Sept. 8, 2011). In contrast, even according to each of the aforementioned evidence, even if tort liability is separate from tort liability, the Defendant substantially unduly unduly unduly abused KRW 30,000,000.

It is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant acquired the above money without any legal ground, and there is no other evidence.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.