1. Of the monetary payment portion of the judgment of the court of first instance against Defendant C, KRW 59,801,162, and the said portion from July 12, 2016 to March 2018.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: (a) the calculation table of the claim for return of unjust enrichment in the annexed Form of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revised in the annexed Form of this judgment; and (b) the plaintiff A, from the preparatory document dated February 27, 2018, recognized the additional loan amount of KRW 100,000,000,000 not included in the loan money approved by the court of first instance; and (c) the additional loan amount of KRW 100,000,000 on September 10, 201, which is not included in the loan money approved by the court of

In addition to the addition of the judgment of the court of first instance as stated below with regard to the additional argument by Defendant C, the part as stated in the following subparagraphs, Chapters 21 through 4, 7, shall be used. As such, this part shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, as it is, inasmuch as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is stated.

2. The portion of the money that the Plaintiff paid to Defendant C in accordance with the above legal doctrine is identical to the calculation table for the return of unjust enrichment in attached Form, and the amount that the Plaintiff paid to Defendant C in excess of the amount that the Plaintiff paid to Defendant C is KRW 59,801,162.

Accordingly, Defendant C filed a claim against Plaintiff A for the payment of unjust enrichment of KRW 59,801,162 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from January 28, 2016, on the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case.

However, the obligation to return unjust enrichment is an obligation with no fixed due date, and in principle, liability arises from the following day after receiving a claim for performance, and unless there is any evidence to prove that Plaintiff A claimed performance prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit, only the payment of damages for delay calculated from the day following the delivery date of the duplicate of the instant complaint

(A) Under Article 748(2) of the Civil Act, a malicious beneficiary may claim interest from the date of receipt. However, in this case, Defendant C does not have any assertion or proof as to the fact that he is a malicious beneficiary. July 12, 2016.