1. The part concerning the claim for damages in the judgment of the first instance, including the claim extended before the remand, is as follows.

1. The plaintiff's claim for damages is dismissed in the scope of the judgment of the court of first instance after remand, and the judgment of the court of first instance which accepted only a part of the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment, is reversed and remanded in the judgment of the court of first instance before remanding the case. As such, the scope of the judgment of the court of first instance after remand is limited to the claim for damages.

2. Recognizing the corresponding portion of the judgment of the first instance court pursuant to the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the phrase “10 units” in the number of Nos. 24 column in the third table 1 shall be read as “six units”; “10 transfers and Article 6 shall be refused to accept”; “6 India and Article 10 shall be refused to accept”; and the summary of the specific facts shall be specified as follows.

① On August 12, 2010, the Jeju District Court 2010No. 581 on the instant movable owned by the Defendant, the auction date, and C purchased the instant movable upon obtaining permission for sale as the highest price purchaser in the participation of the debtor via his employee L.

Since August 14, 2010, the instant movable sold KRW 140 million to D on August 14, 2010, and again sold KRW 50 million to E on December 1, 201.

② On December 7, 2011, E filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the delivery of the instant movable property as Jeju District Court 201Kadan22183.

The Defendant asserted that he is the legitimate owner of the instant movable, and refused to return the instant movable and continued to possess it in the instant lawsuit.

On March 20, 2012, the above court rejected the Defendant’s assertion and rendered a judgment that “the Defendant shall deliver the instant movable property to E”.

Although the defendant filed an appeal (No. 2012Na785) and filed an appeal (Supreme Court Decision 2012Da84998) against this, the above judgment became final and conclusive on December 20, 2012.

(3) E shall be August 7, 2013.