1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. On September 12, 2013, the Plaintiff was sentenced to eight months imprisonment for fraud, etc. on September 12, 2013, on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff, as a criminal fact, by deceiving the Defendant as if the marriage between the Defendant and Cambodia was invalidated, and by deceiving the Defendant as if he were married to another woman; and (b) the Defendant acquired each transfer of KRW 2 million on November 28, 201 and December 7, 201 from the Defendant, in terms of its expenses.

(Seoul District Court Decision 2013Gohap911).B

Around August 6, 2013, when the above criminal procedure was pending, D, who was the Plaintiff, agreed with the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff at KRW 8 million.

D paid 3 million won out of the agreed amount to the Defendant, and the remaining 5 million won was agreed to be paid by D if the Plaintiff did not pay it.

In the above judgment, the plaintiff agrees with the defendant as a reason for mitigation of punishment.

C. Although the Plaintiff and the Prosecutor appealed against the foregoing judgment, the judgment dismissing the appeal was rendered on November 22, 2013 (Seoul District Court 2013No3057) and the judgment dismissing the appeal was rendered on January 24, 2014 (Supreme Court Decision 201Do15756).

On November 19, 2013, the defendant submitted a petition to the appellate court of the above criminal procedure to the effect that the agreement is revoked.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was detained on July 2013, and the amount agreed upon between the Defendant and the Defendant was set at KRW 8 million and paid KRW 3 million among them, and the remainder of KRW 5 million shall be paid after five months. However, since the Defendant unilaterally cancelled the agreement because it did not exceed three months from the date of the above agreement, the Defendant ought to return the amount of KRW 3 million to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. The Defendant’s assertion submitted a petition to the effect that the agreement is revoked in the appellate court of criminal proceedings against the Plaintiff by the Plaintiff that the Defendant received KRW 3 million from among the KRW 10 million acquired by deception and stated the fact that the agreement was reached.