1. Defendant C Co., Ltd. shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 500,000,000 as well as its annual interest from April 25, 2016 to August 10, 2017.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) is the owner of the sports center in the E-building located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant sports center”) and Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) leased the instant sports center to the Plaintiff.

The sports center of this case provides that the sports center of this case shall use the sports center of this case on the condition that the members pay the deposit money at the time of entrance and pay annual annual fee (user fee). The defendant B shall be fully responsible for the members (including the deposit payment member) who received membership fees from the defendant B prior to the commencement date of the instant lease contract under the instant sports center lease agreement concluded on April 12, 2013 between the defendant B and the plaintiff (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and the plaintiff shall receive facility user fees from the defendant B (including the deposit payment member, etc.) after the commencement of the instant lease agreement, and shall not claim all the amount against the plaintiff.

However, after the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant C’s representative director, who is the contractor, was convicted of acquiring the sales price from the buyer, in relation to the business of selling officetels, and the issue of assault and delinquency in paying the sales price to Defendant C’s employees is the problem. In addition, the members of the instant sports center refused to pay the annual fee and led to approximately KRW 2,310,764,50 of the annual fee from 2013 to 2015, the amount of the annual fee of the members was reduced to approximately KRW 2,310,764,50. Accordingly, the Defendant B obtained profits from releasing the amount of the deposit obligation to be returned to the existing members, and the Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to the same amount.

Therefore, Defendant B is the return of unjust enrichment.