1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 18, 2015, the Plaintiff opened the Defendant’s tax-favored comprehensive savings account (Account Number:B account; hereinafter “40 million won account”) and deposited KRW 40 million.

B. On March 11, 2015, the Plaintiff terminated the Defendant’s livelihood-type savings account of KRW 30 million (hereinafter “30 million account”) on the ground that the Plaintiff was favorable in taxation, and then “10 million won account for the tax-favored comprehensive savings account of KRW 30 million” (hereinafter “10 million account”) and “10 million account for tax-favored comprehensive savings account of KRW 40 million”.

) Although the account was opened in installments, upon cancelling the 40 million won account and cancelling the tax on interest income, the account was canceled again with the 30 million won account, and the 40 million won account was restored to the 40 million won account. [The ground for recognition: evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and evidence Nos. 1 through 20 (the plaintiff was a site for the authenticity of evidence Nos. 7 and 10 through 20 (the plaintiff was a site for the authenticity of evidence Nos. 7 and 10 through 20). However, the above evidence can be stored by the defendant in accordance with internal rules, but as seen below, the plaintiff's entire purport of the pleading is all acknowledged by the whole purport of the pleading, such as the fact that the plaintiff remitted money to the Saemaul Bank of Korea after cancelling February 2, 2006.

2. Summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion (based on the written modification of the lawsuit on April 20, 2016)

A. The Plaintiff did not terminate the claim for damages or the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment with the KRW 30 million and the KRW 10 million. The Defendant shall return the deposit KRW 40 million to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment or tort damages.

B. The Defendant did not demand the Plaintiff’s consent to the collection and use of personal information, forged the Plaintiff’s access money list, and leaked information irrelevant to the principal lawsuit without the Plaintiff’s consent, and thus, sought payment of KRW 44 million as damages and KRW 1 million as consolation money.

3. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s judgment on unjust enrichment or tort claim is KRW 40 million in the complaint on March 11, 2015.