2. Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act (in a case where the applicable provisions of Acts are deemed to exist);

3. The part dismissing part of the appeal (the part demanding the materials) asserts that the defendant is obligated to pay 30 million won to the plaintiff as consolation money in consideration of all the circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant deceivings the plaintiff and borrowed money, the amount of money by deception, the period of default, the economic damages suffered by the plaintiff, the defendant's nature of crime, etc.

However, in a case where property damage occurs due to the nonperformance of a contract, the mental suffering which the contracting party received shall be deemed to have been recovered by compensating for property damage. Thus, there are special circumstances that the compensation for property damage has sustained irrecoverable mental suffering, and the compensation for mental suffering may be recognized only where the other party knew or could have known such circumstance.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da18959, Dec. 13, 2007). In addition, it is insufficient to recognize that there was a special circumstance that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone incurred an irrecoverable mental suffering due to the compensation of property damage to the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for consolation money is rejected.