1. Defendant C’s KRW 2,006,40 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from March 21, 2015 to December 3, 2015.

1. Recognizing the fact, the Plaintiff was made a false statement to the effect that “When sending the money, the Plaintiff would have the payment of interest at a high rate created the transaction performance and get the loan of the passbook.”

On October 22, 2014, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 10 million to the national bank account (D) in the name of Defendant B, and KRW 10 million on October 23, 2014, and transferred KRW 8 million to the Defendant C’s bank account (E) on October 27, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, including the number, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Defendants’ liability

A. In full view of the overall purport of the argument at the inquiry inquiry reply made on January 7, 2015, and the inquiry inquiry reply made on January 26, 2015 at the place of Esan Station of the National Bank M&C branch, the Korean Bank T&C branch, and the fact-finding inquiry made on January 26, 2015, the Defendant’s criminal act withdraws the total amount of KRW 20 million transferred to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant B until October 25, 2014, and withdraws KRW 5,93,600 out of KRW 8 million that was transferred to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant C on October 27, 2014. There is no evidence to acknowledge that the aforementioned withdrawn money as above belongs to the Defendants’ substantial benefits.

Therefore, Defendant B’s liability for return of unjust enrichment is not recognized, and Defendant C’s liability for return of unjust enrichment is recognized only within the scope of KRW 2,006,400 remaining without withdrawal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Da51239, Nov. 29, 2007; 2010Da37325, Sept. 8, 201).

There is no evidence to acknowledge the Defendants’ intentional act, and furthermore, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendants could have predicted the fact that the Defendants were involved in a transaction corresponding to a tort through the bank deposit account or deposit passbook, and that the Defendants could have easily committed such tort, considering the following as a whole: (a) the statement in the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 including a Serial number, and each inquiry inquiry inquiry reply at the station of Chuncheon branch office.