A. A. Around November 2003, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to arrange for the Defendant to kill the Plaintiff. At that time, the Plaintiff paid KRW 34,000,000 to the Defendant.

B. However, on July 30, 2004, the Defendant drafted a letter of performance stating that “The Defendant received 34,000,000 won from the Plaintiff as the price for the goods, and will pay the said amount by August 5, 2004, because the goods were not delivered within the time limit. If this is on the way, it will assume all civil and criminal responsibilities.” (hereinafter “instant performance letter”).

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts, the Defendant agreed to prepare the instant written statement of performance to the Plaintiff on July 30, 2004, and pay KRW 34,000,000 to the August 5, 2004. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 34,000,000 won and damages for delay at each rate of 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act from August 6, 2004 to February 26, 2014, the delivery date of the copy of the instant written statement, and from the next day to the date of full payment.

In this regard, the defendant reported that he actually purchased gold bullion from C, etc., so that the plaintiff can purchase gold bullion to the defendant, and that it was true that the defendant introduced C, etc. to the plaintiff, but that C, who did not implement the promise, promised C, to return gold bullion purchase price to the plaintiff, and thereafter C provided the plaintiff with a release on bail for Hobox and paid the debt.

First of all, as to the argument that C has discharged the Defendant’s obligation to the Plaintiff, there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and the Plaintiff receives from the Defendant a letter of performance of the instant case.