1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total cost of a lawsuit shall be borne individually by each party.

purport.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. A. Around August 6, 2009, the Defendant made an investment in the Plaintiff, Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, in the project for the implementation of a multi-purpose apartment complex, and said that the Plaintiff would be in charge of material management at the above D construction site, while allowing the Plaintiff to operate the house at the above D construction site, at the same time.

The Plaintiff, upon the Defendant’s request, paid KRW 20 million to E on August 8, 2009. In addition, the Plaintiff paid KRW 5 million to the Defendant on August 31, 2009, KRW 5 million on September 6, 2009, KRW 5 million on September 7, 2009, KRW 7 million on November 11, 2009, KRW 5 million on March 12, 2010, KRW 3 million on January 10, 2010, KRW 5 million on February 27, 2010, KRW 5 million on March 201, and KRW 3 million on March 12, 2010, KRW 5 million on March 27, 2010, and KRW 3 million on December 4, 2010, respectively.

However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to give the plaintiff the right to operate the house or to find employment as a material management unit.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the sum of KRW 54,50,000 as compensation for damages or the return of unjust enrichment.

B. On August 6, 2009, the Defendant: (a) had no intent or ability to arrange employment; (b) had the Plaintiff operate the house on the said D Construction site; (c) had the Plaintiff left the workplace when the Plaintiff’s husband and wife was present by deceiving the Plaintiff to be employed in charge of material management in the said construction site; (d) had the Plaintiff left the workplace when the Plaintiff was present; (c) had the Plaintiff left the workplace when the Plaintiff was present by deceiving the head of the I T Twit located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to be employed by the manager of the I Twit; and (d) had the Plaintiff left the workplace when the Plaintiff was present at the time on November 201, 2012 by deceiving the Plaintiff to be employed as a modern construction full-time employee; and (e) had the Plaintiff left the workplace when the Plaintiff was present at the time; and (e) had the Plaintiff complete employment arrangement by concluding the employment arrangement with the Plaintiff on May 16, 2013 to have the Plaintiff acquire it by deceiving the Plaintiff under the name of personnel management expenses.

Therefore, it is true.