1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 10, 2017, Plaintiff A deposited KRW 100 million into the Defendant’s account.

B. Around that time, “10 million won was returned after May 10, 2017 at the time the D public auction in progress was not awarded (five million won). 50% of the borrowed amount was borrowed for one year at the time of the successful bid and paid 50% of the borrowed amount as interest. The borroweder’s e, guarantorF, and guarantor’s failure to pay the borrowed amount was written.”

C. On May 15, 2017, Plaintiff B deposited KRW 20 million into the Defendant’s account.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the plaintiffs' claims

A. Each money deposited into the Defendant’s account filed by the Plaintiffs is the money loaned by the Plaintiffs to the Defendant, which falls short of the funds for the Plaintiffs’ bid for the public auction of officetel D in the old and American City.

Plaintiff

A's loan is agreed to pay interest of 50%.

Even if it is not so, the defendant did not have any legal ground for holding the money received from the plaintiffs, and thus unjust enrichment.

Therefore, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiffs the money stated in the purport of the claim.

B. Determination 1) The Plaintiffs’ money was deposited into the Defendant’s account and there is no other circumstance to deem that there was an agreement between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant. Even according to the above loan certificate, the borrower is merely indicated as E, and G related to the Defendant is also indicated as the guarantor. Even in light of the content of the loan certificate, G only expressed that it returned KRW 100 million at the time of a failed inspection. In addition, the witness E’s testimony that conforms to the Plaintiffs’ assertion cannot be trusted at all. (2) Rather, considering the overall purport of the arguments in each statement in the evidence No. 1 through No. 15, the Plaintiffs lent the above money to E and F, and the above two parties partially repaid their existing obligations to H.