A. The Plaintiff is an organization that establishes and operates a child welfare facility called “C” from November 2005.

The defendant was registered with the competent authority as the operator of the above C from November 2005 to March 25, 2015.

B. On December 10, 2007, the Defendant transferred the status of operator C to D on December 10, 2007, and received 12 million won in return.

However, both D and Defendant did not follow the procedure of registering the change of C’s operator to the competent authorities.

C. F is a member of a religious order that supports the Plaintiff’s punishment.

In March 12, 2015, a notarial deed containing the content that the Defendant and F would change the name of the C representative from the Defendant to the name of E that the Plaintiff designates, and in return, F would pay the Defendant KRW 14 million (hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”) was prepared by a notary public (hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”).

Accordingly, F paid KRW 14 million to the Defendant, and the head of Busan Central District Office, the competent authority of C, was to abolish the child welfare facilities under the name of the Defendant on March 25, 2015 and to accept the report of new installation of the child welfare facilities under the name of E on the ground of the change of the operator of the child welfare facilities.

On February 1, 2016, F transferred the right to claim return of KRW 14 million paid to the Plaintiff according to the instant notarial deed to the Defendant, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the said claim on February 24, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, F's testimony of the witness at the trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. On December 10, 2007, the Defendant: (a) transferred the C’s operating rights to D on December 10, 2007, and had already been paid KRW 12 million to D; (b) but (c) if the competent authority did not pay additional money to C with the fact that C was registered as the operator of C, the Defendant’s assertion to abolish C by intimidation the person related to the operation of the said center or F, thereby taking KRW 14 million from F.

This is a tort.