The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. From August 1, 2019, the Plaintiff

8.5. By the D’s request, the remittance of KRW 23,222,22 to Defendant B as listed below:

A B B 22,222 E on August 1, 2019, the account number of the recipient who is a temporary remitter, KRW B 17,000,000 E on August 2, 2019 and KRW B 17,000,000 on August 5, 2019.

B. On August 6, 2019, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 8,460,00 to Defendant C upon D’s request.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that Nonparty D was threatened by Nonparty D’s intimidation, and transferred money to D as ordered by D by deceiving the Plaintiff to the effect that he was threatened by Nonparty D. The Defendants are co-offenders. The Defendants obtained profits by receiving the money remitted by the Plaintiff without any legal cause, and the Defendants are obligated to return the said money to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

3. Determination

A. In a case where a party to a contract directly provides a third party who has a different contractual relationship with the other party by shortening the performance process by the direction of the other party, etc. (in a case where benefits have been provided in a so-called triang relationship), not only the other party has provided a benefit to the other party, but also the other party has provided a benefit to the third party.

Therefore, a party to a contract cannot file a claim for restitution of unjust enrichment against a third party on the ground that he/she received payment without legal cause.

In such a case, if either party to a contract is able to file a claim for return of unjust enrichment against a third party on the ground that there is a defect in the legal relationship of a person interested in the cause for which the contract provided performance to the other party or that the contract was terminated, it would transfer the risk burden pursuant to the contract under its own responsibility to the third party, thereby violating the principle of contract law, and the third party, who is the beneficiary, has the right to