1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 32,00,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from September 26, 2015 to December 16, 2015; and (b) the Plaintiff.

1.The following facts of recognition do not conflict between the Parties:

On September 25, 2015, the Plaintiff’s accounting staff erroneously transferred the construction cost of KRW 32 million to the Jinjin Fire Fighting Co., Ltd., which had been traded with the Plaintiff before it was traded with the Plaintiff, to the deposit account (cash bank and account number: post office 2015090399) of the Dong private-owned Co., Ltd.

B. On June 12, 2015, Dong civil company was merged with the defendant company.

C. The Plaintiff discovered the above error remittance and immediately contacted the Defendant Company to return KRW 32 million, which caused the erroneous remittance.

2. When a remitter transfers a bank account to an addressee’s deposit account, regardless of whether there is a legal relationship between the remitter and the Defendant as the cause of the account transfer, a deposit contract equivalent to the amount of the account transfer is established between the addressee and the receiving bank. In this case, even though there is no legal relationship between the remitter and the receiving bank as the cause of account transfer, if the addressee acquires a deposit claim equivalent to the amount of the account transfer by account transfer even though there is no legal relationship between the remitter and the receiving bank, the remitter is entitled to claim return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the above amount against the payee (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da51239, Nov. 29, 2007). According to the above facts, even though there is no legal relationship as the cause of account transfer between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Plaintiff transfers KRW 32 million to the Defendant’s account by mistake and acquires a deposit claim equivalent to KRW 2 million from 3.5 million to 200,000,000 per annum 16.