1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On December 30, 201, the Plaintiff paid KRW 94,958,305 to the Defendant for the advance payment for the purchase of scrap metal, but the Defendant did not supply the scrap metal to the Plaintiff and gained unjust enrichment equivalent to the advance payment. As such, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the aforementioned advance payment amounting to KRW 94,958,305 and damages for delay.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. In addition to the purport of the entire pleadings in the written evidence No. 2, the fact that the Defendant completed the registration of wholesale business, including the scrap metal, with the trade name “D” around September 12, 2009, and that the Defendant transferred KRW 94,958,305 from the Plaintiff’s account to the Defendant’s business account on December 30, 201 is recognized.

However, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the Defendant’s supply of scrap metal to the Plaintiff and whether the Defendant received the said money from the Plaintiff as advance payment only with the statement of No. 1, and there is no other obvious evidence to acknowledge it.

(B) The defendant asserts that there is no transactional relationship with the plaintiff only with the third party.

Even if the Defendant received KRW 94,958,305 from the Plaintiff as an advance payment for the sales of scrap metal, insofar as there is no evidence to deem that the due date for the supply of scrap metal or the return of advance payment was determined, the period of extinctive prescription for the commercial period of five years from December 30, 201, when the Plaintiff is able to exercise the right to claim the return of advance payment. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion that the extinctive prescription expired is reasonable, and the Plaintiff’s claim for return of advance payment is groundless.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.