1. Defendant B’s KRW 39,100,000 as well as 5% per annum from August 29, 2013 to November 3, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B used the position of “Seoul Ddong Land Compensation Promotion Chairperson,” and Defendant C is a real estate agent.

B. The land located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government was deposited with compensation for losses with the former authority in accordance with Article 2 of the Addenda of the former River Act, from around 1990 to around 191. The State deposited compensation for losses with the former authority on February 24, 1997. Since F, who is the former authority to have the right to interest and received the deposit money was nationalized by reserving the objection and receiving it on February 24, 1997, there was no possibility of receiving compensation for losses even if it was filed against the State.

Nevertheless, on March 2013, Defendant B had Defendant C hold a free briefing session related to compensation for land loss.

C. Defendant B made a false statement to the Plaintiff that “When the Plaintiff acquired claims related to compensation for losses from the landowner located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, he/she may receive compensation for additional losses and raise profits therefrom. If he/she lost in the lawsuit, he/she would compensate for the total amount of the investment amount.”

On August 28, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 39,100,000 to the deposit account in the name of G certified judicial scrivener on August 28, 2013, as the amount of compensation for losses to 17 of the 877 square meters of the land E located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

On February 7, 2017, Defendant B was convicted of committing a crime, such as deceiving the Plaintiff and deceiving the Plaintiff KRW 39.1 million (Seoul Central District Court 2016Da4622, 6197 (combined)), and Defendant B appealed against it (Seoul Central District Court 2017No639), but the dismissal of appeal on September 29, 2017 became final and conclusive around that time.

E. Defendant C was investigated by committing a crime such as fraud in collusion with Defendant B in connection with the conclusion of the above contract for acquisition of the right to claim for compensation for land loss, but was subject to a disposition of suspicion.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, and Gap evidence 4.