1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 8, 2014, the Plaintiff entered the above information on the website, upon accessing the Internet website designated by the Plaintiff to enter the name and account number of the bank that the Plaintiff traded, its password, and its security card number, etc. from a person who assumes a false criminal investigation of the high-tech prosecutor’s office and from a person who assumes an investigator under his/her jurisdiction.

B. On January 8, 2014, the bearers of the name account transferred KRW 11,940,728 in total to Defendant B’s bank account six times, including the following information entered by the Plaintiff without the Plaintiff’s consent, and KRW 4,790,363 in total to Defendant C’s bank account on three occasions, including the following: (a) the sum of KRW 11,940,728 in Defendant C’s bank account; and (b) the sum of KRW 5,970,344 in total to Defendant C’s bank account on three occasions; and (c) KRW 11,030,854 in Defendant D’s bank account on three occasions.

C. The Defendants, prior to the above transfer, sent a password to the bearer of the bank account by reporting the passbook or cash withdrawal card, etc., and the bearer of the account was using this to withdraw the money transferred from the Plaintiff’s bank account to the Defendant’s bank account.

【Ground of Recognition: Defendant C and D with no dispute: Each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, accepted agricultural cooperatives, Seocho Seoul Agricultural Cooperatives, and the Postal Service Information Center's fact-finding, each reply to the fact-finding, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. (1) The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants are obligated to return the amount of money transferred from the Plaintiff’s bank account to the Plaintiff’s bank account without any legal ground. Thus, the Defendants are obligated to return it to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

(2) The plaintiff is in a selective relationship with the claim for damages, but the decision is made according to the order of priority. (2) Therefore, the plaintiff is examined.