1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The plaintiff's assertion transferred the amount of KRW 4,364,640 (hereinafter "the amount of this case") to the defendant's national bank account on Sep. 2, 2005, KRW 845,130, and KRW 1,519,510 on Jan. 24, 2006, to the defendant's national bank account. This was the defendant's obligation to return the amount of this case to the defendant without any transactional relation.

2. The burden of proving that the Plaintiff remitted the instant money to the Plaintiff without any transactional relationship and the Defendant received the instant money without any legal ground is the Plaintiff who asserts this.

According to the evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the Plaintiff remitted the Defendant’s national bank account (Account Number C, hereinafter “instant account”) to KRW 2,845,130 on September 9, 2005, and KRW 1,519,510 on January 24, 2006.

However, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the plaintiff acquired the right to operate a restaurant within the E University located in Scheon-si from D and operated the restaurant under the name of F (hereinafter "F") for the plaintiff's account from August 1, 2005 to December 7, 2006. The defendant, who is the wife of the above FF representative G, was in charge of F accounting affairs at the time. Further, the defendant's account was recognized as the sum of the transfer from the defendant's account to the plaintiff's account at the time of the time to December 9, 2005, and the transfer from the defendant's account at the time to the plaintiff's account at the time of the transfer to 4,246,50 won, 50 won, 2,589, 000 won, 2,589, 200 won, 13.6, 2039, 2006

The following circumstances revealed by the above facts of recognition, namely, the defendant, who was the wife of the F representative G and the general manager of F's accounting affairs at the time, appears to have used the instant account, which is the defendant's personal account, for the company's business purpose, according to G's instruction or request, and the plaintiff seems to have remitted the instant money to the defendant's instant account in the course of operating the said restaurant in the F's name, and the plaintiff is merely the number of copies.