1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The parties' assertion

A. On December 30, 2009, the Plaintiff asserted that C would purchase the intermediate and director-paid vehicle at C’s request and that C would not purchase the said vehicle on the following day, but C would promise C to return the said money by holding contact with the Defendant.

Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks payment of the down payment of KRW 2 million and damages for delay to the Defendant.

B. The Defendant alleged that C had a claim equivalent to KRW 40 million against C, and in order to recover the above claim, C lent the account in the name of the Defendant to C, and both the money deposited by the Plaintiff to the said account was used by C.

Therefore, the defendant is not obligated to return the above money to the plaintiff.

2. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the plaintiff transferred KRW 2 million to the account under the name of the defendant on December 30, 2009, but only the above fact of recognition was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant.

It is insufficient to view that the defendant made unjust enrichment equivalent to the above money, and there is no other evidence to prove the plaintiff's above assertion.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, the defendant's appeal is accepted and the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as per Disposition.