A. Upon the Defendant’s recommendation, the Plaintiff invested KRW 30 million on May 15, 2015, and KRW 10 million on November 22, 2015, respectively, in C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) in which the Defendant works as an investment consultant.

B. On May 14, 2017, the maturity date of the investment amount of KRW 30 million has arrived, but the Plaintiff did not receive any return of the investment principal, and the representative D of the non-party company was indicted of a violation of the Act on the Regulation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and sentenced to imprisonment, thereby making it difficult for the Plaintiff to receive the investment payment even in the future.

The originator B owes to the investor A of C (State) the obligation to recover the full amount of principal invested in C (State) and to perform the obligation to repay the full amount of principal, and will be subject to any legal liability in the event of failure to perform the obligation or in the event of any problem.

C. On May 18, 2017, the Defendant issued to the Plaintiff a letter with the following content:

(hereinafter “each of the instant statements”). [The grounds for recognition] did not dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, and Gap evidence 2-3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. The determination document on the cause of a claim shall be objectively interpreted as having expressed the intent of the party in accordance with the contents of the language stated in the relevant disposal document, barring any special circumstance where the authenticity is acknowledged. In the event that there is a difference in the interpretation of a contract between the parties and thus the interpretation of the parties expressed in the disposal document is at issue, it shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules by comprehensively taking into account the contents of the text, the motive and background leading up to the agreement, the purpose to be achieved

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 99Da23574, Feb. 27, 2001; 2005Da24349, Mar. 10, 2006). In light of the following, the aforementioned evidence and evidence each of subparagraph 4-1 through 4-4.