1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff against the defendant C, who is equivalent to the subsequent amount of payment order.

1. The facts underlying the dispute, ① Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) leased (a lease deposit KRW 90 million, monthly rent of KRW 8 million) land and its ground buildings and machinery to F Co., Ltd. (F) (hereinafter “F”).

② Around February 2017, G received a discount on three promissory notes from Defendant E via Defendant E (the total face value of KRW 48 million). The Defendant Company guaranteed the payment of the face value to I.

However, as G could not pay a bill of exchange, the Defendant Company paid KRW 13 million to I on May 8, 2017.

③ On June 7, 2017, the Plaintiff sought the Defendants together with G for the purpose of taking over the F’s right of lease.

In order to transfer the right of lease, the Defendants demanded the payment of the bill of exchange KRW 13 million.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 13 million to the Defendant Company on its job.

④ However, the Defendants demanded that the Plaintiff take over additional fees of KRW 22,00,000,000 for the excavation period against Defendant G, and the Plaintiff refused this and eventually led to the conclusion of negotiations regarding the lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Claim against the defendant company

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant Company paid KRW 13 million, which is part of the lease deposit, to negotiate a lease agreement with the Defendant Company at the request of the Defendants, to the Defendant Company. Since a lease agreement was not concluded, the Defendant Company should return KRW 13 million, which was paid without any legal cause.

B. (1) In full view of the respective statements and arguments in the evidence Nos. 5 and 9 and the purport of the entire pleadings, G intended to change a lessee, and G did not enter into a consultation with the Defendant’s side to transfer the said money at his own request on the ground that “I would not transfer the money of KRW 13 million related to the bill book.”