1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

On August 18, 2009, the Plaintiff asserted for the return of unjust enrichment due to the remittance of KRW 20,000,000, when the principal debtor D borrowed KRW 250,000,000 from the Defendant, the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed only KRW 50,00,000 among them, and on May 4, 2010, remitted KRW 70,000 by mistake to the Defendant for the payment of KRW 50,00,000.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return to the plaintiff KRW 20,000,000 and damages for delay as unjust enrichment.

On December 7, 2007, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant lent KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff, in addition to the above joint and several guarantee claim against the Plaintiff, and received KRW 20,000,000 from the repayment of the above loan claim on May 4, 2010.

Therefore, the defendant did not gain 20,000,000 won without any legal ground, since it is not a remittance of the plaintiff's error.

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the evidence Nos. 2 through 5, it is recognized that the Defendant lent KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff on December 7, 2007 by 2.5% per month, and that the Defendant urged the payment of the above loan by a peremptory notice from April 2009 to December 20 of the same year.

In light of these facts, it is reasonable to view that KRW 20,00,000, which the Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant on May 4, 2010 in excess of the limit of joint and several sureties was the repayment for the said loan.

On December 28, 2009, the Plaintiff claimed that the Plaintiff paid KRW 20,000,000 out of the loans to the Defendant around December 28, 2009, and paid KRW 10,400,000 as the principal remaining after the interest was paid on February 2, 2010.

It is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff paid the above loans of KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant only with the statement of evidence Nos. 7 through 9, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Thus, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is not accepted.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for return of unjust enrichment is without merit.

A claim is filed for KRW 2,200,000 in the name of the withdrawal of a request for auction.