1. The Defendant’s KRW 60 million to the Plaintiff, as well as 15% per annum from August 25, 2018 to May 31, 2019.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to the grounds for the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 12, the plaintiff entered into an agreement with the defendant as a member of the golf course on November 24, 2009, and paid the defendant a sum of KRW 20 million on September 23, 201, and KRW 60 million on September 23, 201, and registered as a member of the golf course at that time, and registered as a member of the golf course at that time, and accordingly, the plaintiff agreed that the return of the membership fee at that time may be requested five years after the date of acquisition of the membership. Accordingly, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff requested the defendant to return the membership fee at that time to the defendant around March 23, 2017.

According to this, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 60 million won and damages for delay.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. Defendant’s assertion (1) The Plaintiff did not deposit the membership fee into the designated account as stated in the membership agreement, and thus, the Defendant is not liable.

(2) In the case of an individual member, the membership fee is KRW 80 million, and the Plaintiff paid only KRW 60 million.

The membership agreement states that a refund shall be made after deducting 10% of the total amount of the membership fee if a request for cancellation is made in a state where the membership fee is not paid in full. Since the plaintiff did not pay in full, 8 million won, which is 10% of the total amount of the membership fee, shall be deducted.

(3) The Plaintiff shall acquire the right as a member only when he/she deposits 80 million won into the designated account.

However, the Plaintiff paid KRW 60 million and did not pay the remainder of KRW 20 million, and thus, the Plaintiff used the golf course with only paying the user fee for the golf course corresponding to the membership fee, even though it is paid the user fee for the golf course corresponding to the non-member.

Therefore, the plaintiff should return to the defendant the difference in the user fee of the golf course (the user fee of the nonmember - the user fee of the golf course) as unjust enrichment, which offsets the plaintiff's right to return the admission fee against the defendant.