A. A. Around March 26, 2006, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, who were legally married couple, drafted a written agreement with the following content (hereinafter “instant written agreement”).

1. The defendant is not entitled to claim expenses, such as child support, etc., for bringing up Category C.

2. C does not, for any reason, leave C again to the Plaintiff before graduation from a university.

In addition, the plaintiff can not claim custody of C again before the university graduate.

In the case of the above-mentioned 1 and 2, the person who has violated 100 million won as consolation money and damages shall be the cycle.

(hereinafter “instant KRW 100,000,000”). Defendantor C does not communicate with Plaintiffor D in any case until a university student becomes a university student.

B. From around 2006, the Defendant, after the divorce between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, brought up C from around 2006 (the sixth grade of elementary school at that time), and the Plaintiff has been bringing up C from around 2009 to the third grade of middle school (the third grade of middle school at that time).

Grounds for recognition: Facts without dispute, A1, and the whole purport of the pleading.

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff's assertion violates the letter of agreement in this case, and caused the plaintiff to rear C, his father, his father, from the third grade of the middle school, which was far earlier than university graduates, and thus, the plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 100 million and damages for delay thereof to the plaintiff in accordance with the payment agreement in the amount of KRW 100 million.

B. (1) Determination (1) The instant KRW 100 million payment agreement in nature of the instant 100 million payment agreement is reasonable to view the agreement to pay KRW 100 million to the other party for consolation money and damages when the Plaintiff or the Defendant violated the instant 100 million payment agreement, and it is reasonable to regard the agreement as liquidated damages for breach of the instant 10 million payment agreement.

The defendant asserts that the payment agreement of KRW 100 million was made by the plaintiff's coercion, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it.