1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion entered into an investment contract with the Defendant on March 14, 2017 with respect to the EPC operation business located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, and paid the down payment of KRW 4 million to the Defendant in cash on the same day.

On April 18, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 20 million to the Defendant, which is the full amount of the investment money agreed under the said investment contract. On March 14, 2017, the Plaintiff decided to convert the down payment of KRW 4 million into the investment amount of other investments.

If the Defendant additionally invests KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff, the Defendant recommended that the Plaintiff be able to make an investment more than KRW 24 million in a PC, including the sum of KRW 4 million paid by the Plaintiff on March 14, 2017, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 20 million to the Defendant on May 24, 2017.

However, since the defendant did not make an investment of 24 million won in the PC, it is obligated to return it to the plaintiff with unjust enrichment.

2. The written evidence Nos. 1 and 2 evidence alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff paid the down payment amount of KRW 4 million to the Defendant on March 14, 2017, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

In addition, according to the evidence No. 2, although the plaintiff transferred KRW 20 million to the defendant on May 24, 2017, it is not sufficient to recognize that the above fact of recognition alone paid the above KRW 20 million to the defendant as investment, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, according to the statements in Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, it is recognized that the defendant received the above KRW 20 million from the plaintiff to the third party upon the plaintiff's request for delivery of the investment money for other businesses unrelated to the defendant, and then remitted the money to the third party on the same day.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked and the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as per Disposition.