1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. According to the selective claims added by this court, the defendant 5,750.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is a business operator engaged in quasi-investment advisory business, etc., and the defendant is a member who used similar investment advisory goods that the plaintiff served.

B. The Defendant subscribed to the terms and conditions of use (hereinafter “instant terms and conditions of use”) and refund terms and conditions through the Plaintiff’s “C” website, a similar investment advisory brand (hereinafter “instant terms and conditions”), and concluded a contract for the use of paid stocks information services (hereinafter “instant services”) with the Plaintiff as follows, and used them for a total of 95 days from August 10, 2018 to November 12, 2018.

User Association Service Commencement Date: (a) KRW 3,400,000 on September 3, 2018, 2018, the agreed service charges of KRW 3,400,000 (fixed price) on September 10, 2018, September 10, 2018; (b) KRW 1,350,000 on October 1, 2018, 3200 on October 12, 2018; (c) KRW 95,750,000 on November 1, 2018; (d) the total amount of KRW 5,750,000 on September 15, 2018.

C. The Defendant made credit settlement of KRW 5,750,000 in total of the service charges of this case as D, and thereafter, upon the Defendant’s revocation request, D Co., Ltd revoked the said credit settlement.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On August 10, 2018, the Defendant concluded a contract to use the instant service with the Plaintiff and used the instant service for a total of 95 days. A credit settlement was revoked regarding KRW 5,750,000 of the instant service charges settled in D and thus refunded from D Co., Ltd.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above KRW 5,750,000 with the agreed service charge under the instant service contract or the return of unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. According to the fact that the Defendant was liable to pay the instant service charges, the Defendant entered into the instant service contract with the Plaintiff and received the instant service from August 10, 2018 to November 12, 2018.