1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a married couple who completed a marriage report with G on August 21, 1985, and is in a divorce lawsuit from July 2014 to that day.

B. Defendant B and F are the Plaintiff’s wife with female students, and Defendant C is the husband of Defendant B.

Defendant E is the Republic of Korea of the Plaintiff due to the South-win of G, and Defendant D is the mother of G and the mother of the Plaintiff.

【Facts without dispute over the ground for recognition, Gap evidence 1, 2-1 and 2-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's ground of claim

A. The Plaintiff filed a claim for return of unjust enrichment and left the management of all property with the wife. G managed the Plaintiff’s Nonghyup Bank account (Account Number: H; hereinafter “instant account”) and traded money with the Defendants several times from June 2003 to January 2015, and the amount paid to the Defendants exceeds the amount received from the Defendants.

The plaintiff did not agree, and there is no reason to pay money to the defendants.

Therefore, the defendants are obligated to return the amount stated in each claim, which is the difference, to the plaintiff, without any legal ground.

B. In managing the instant account, G’s claim for damages arising from a tort was embezzled by frequently remitting large amounts of money to the Defendants without the Plaintiff’s consent or permission, and the Defendants participated in G’s embezzlement by demanding transfer to G or implied transfer.

Therefore, the Defendants are obliged to pay the Plaintiff the amount stated in each claim as compensation for joint tort.

3. Determination

A. (1) According to the evidence No. 3, the determination on the claim for return of unjust enrichment is as follows: (a) from Jun. 2003 to Jan. 2015, several occasions between the instant account and the Defendants’ account; and (b) the amount transferred from the instant account to the Defendants’ name exceeds the amount deposited from the Defendants’ name to the instant account. (c) However, the fact that the money transferred from the instant account to the Defendants’ name is larger than the amount deposited from the Defendants’ name to the instant account. (d)