1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 13, 2014, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 10 million to a single bank account in the name of the Defendant on the same day, around 19:17 on the same day, to the effect that “A bank account in the name of the Defendant shall be loaned KRW 10 million from the second financial right, and shall be repaid at a low interest rate of KRW 50 million.”

B. From 19:29 to 19:36 of the same day, the person whose name was omitted was transferred to the account under the name of the Defendant, and either withdrawn the above KRW 10 million or transferred the same to C who is not related to the Defendant.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant crimes”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, the entries in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and Eul’s evidence No. 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant gains a profit of KRW 10 million from the account transfer to the account of the instant Bosing crime even though there is no legal relationship causing the transfer of the account with the Plaintiff, and thus, the Plaintiff is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the above amount to the Plaintiff, or even if it could have been anticipated that the passbook and cash card in the name of the Plaintiff could be used for the instant Bosing crime, and aids and abets the Defendant to commit the instant Bosing crime by delivering it to the person under whose name the passbook and cash card could be used for the Defendant’s name. As such, the Defendant is liable

B. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 10 million to the Defendant’s account due to the instant Bophishing crime as to the occurrence of the duty to return unjust enrichment 1,00,000 won, however, the Defendant withdrawn the above KRW 10 million.

Although there is no evidence to prove that the above KRW 10 million remains in the above account in the defendant's name, there is a fact that the non-member of the name of the defendant has withdrawn the above KRW 10 million or transferred the above account to C who is not related to the defendant.