1. As to the Plaintiff’s KRW 83,00,000 and KRW 67,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 16,00,000 from December 31, 201 to December 16, 200.

1. Presumed factual basis

A. On November 13, 2006, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant, a licensed real estate agent, a total of KRW 153,000,000,000 in real estate investment, and KRW 50,000 on November 17, 2006, and KRW 153,00,000 in total, as of December 14, 2006 (hereinafter “instant investment”).

B. Around June 2009, the Plaintiff knew that the instant investment amount was not invested in real estate originally planned by the Plaintiff, and requested the return of the investment amount to the Defendant. On September 9, 2009, the Defendant returned KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

C. On March 29, 2010, the Defendant agreed with the Plaintiff to return the instant investment amount (hereinafter “instant agreement”). On December 2006, the Plaintiff received KRW 135,000,000 out of the total amount of the investment amount of KRW 135,000,000 from the Plaintiff, and the amount of KRW 18,000,000 in the passbook A, agricultural cooperatives sent KRW 20,000 to April 10, 2010, and sent KRW 67,000,000 in advance to the Plaintiff. On December 30, 2010, the Plaintiff shall be sent a written confirmation that “The investment profit will be subsequently consulted.”

The Defendant paid KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff on April 10, 2010, and KRW 2,000,000 on August 31, 2010.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 4-2, Gap evidence 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The Plaintiff paid the instant investment money to the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant invested in purchasing Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Library.

However, the Defendant purchased 201, 202, 208, Dong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City apartment commercial building, which was not originally talked to the Plaintiff with the instant investment money, and presented a certificate of registration to the Plaintiff.

Ultimately, the defendant is obligated to compensate for damages caused by tort or return of unjust enrichment, since the defendant deceivings the plaintiff and received the investment of this case from the plaintiff without any cause.

(2) The defendant is against the plaintiff.