1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. This part of the basic facts is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. In the first place, the defendant has granted the right of representation to G as to the loan of the remittance amount of this case to G who is his spouse, and thus the defendant bears the obligation of the borrowed amount.

In addition, the defendant bears the responsibility of expression agency pursuant to Article 125 of the Civil Act, since G has indicated that it shall allow it to use the instant account by allowing it to use, and the defendant bears the responsibility of repayment as the principal of the act of daily household agent by borrowing the remittance amount on behalf of the defendant by G with ordinary household agent authority pursuant to Article 827(1) of the Civil Act.

The act of borrowing the remittance amount of G in this case has the effect on the defendant who is the principal, and thus the defendant is entitled to pay the remittance amount.

B. Preliminary and selectively, the Defendant received the instant remittance amount from the instant account in its name without any legal ground, and sought the return of said amount, as the Defendant received unjust enrichment.

C. 2 preliminary and selectively, the Defendant, by allowing G to use the instant account, solicited or aided by deceiving the Plaintiffs to acquire the instant remittance amount, thereby seeking compensation for damages arising from joint tort.

3. Determination

A. The 1st court's reasoning for this part of the judgment as to the primary claim is as follows: (a) as evidence rejecting the plaintiffs' claims in this part, "H's testimony is contrary to the plaintiffs' allegations, and rather, consistent with the defendant's arguments", the witness H of the trial at the court below stated that "G Ha made an investment of KRW 200 million in the horse in April 2016, and around that time, G and I and Ma and Ma and Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-do investments are divided.

Afterwards, G received KRW 200 million from G as the horse investment fund, and G makes money.