1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant, even though he did not lend money to the Plaintiff on September 18, 1994, issued promissory notes with a face value of KRW 3,00,000 in the name of the Plaintiff and prepared a notarial deed. The Defendant was sentenced to winning the Defendant’s judgment by submitting the notarial deed of the forged promissory notes, etc. as evidence in the case of loan claim claim.

After all, the defendant filed a request for auction of the house owned by the plaintiff in 2007 according to the above judgment, and the plaintiff paid KRW 9,750,000 to the defendant on November 5, 2007 in order to prevent the progress of the above auction.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 30,000,000 won in total, including the above money paid by the plaintiff without any legal ground, and property and mental damage arising from the defendant's infringement of the plaintiff's human rights for a long time and the defendant's failure to engage in his/her occupation.

2. Examination ex officio of the determination.

The Plaintiff had already filed a claim for return of unjust enrichment against the Defendant for the same cause of claim, which became final and conclusive on September 27, 2012 (Seoul District Court Decision 2010Da80236, 2012Na7106).

Therefore, since the claim of this case conflicts with res judicata, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

(B) In addition, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed since the plaintiff's claim is without merit, even if the plaintiff's claim is combined with the statements of Gap's Nos. 1 and 5 and all materials submitted by the plaintiff.