A. On June 28, 1994, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded an insurance contract listed in the separate sheet.

B. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff with the Gwangju District Court 201Gahap7538, which sought payment of insurance proceeds based on the said insurance contract. Around December 24, 2013, the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2013Na675), which was in progress, agreed on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff and the Defendant had to pay insurance proceeds to the Defendant; and (b) the Defendant withdrawn the said lawsuit on December 26, 2013.

The Plaintiff paid all the amount under the agreement of this case to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. At the time of the agreement by the Defendant, the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 44,488,753 to the Defendant as a refund for termination, in addition to the insurance money.

Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the termination refund of KRW 44,488,753 to the Defendant.

B. At the time of the agreement by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff did not separately pay the termination refund to the Defendant.

3. There is no evidence supporting that the Plaintiff agreed to pay the termination refund of KRW 44,488,753 to the Defendant at the time of the instant agreement.

Therefore, insofar as the Plaintiff did not have an obligation to pay the termination refund for the instant insurance contract to the Defendant, and the Defendant disputing this issue and sought the payment of the termination refund to the Plaintiff, there is also benefit of confirmation.

If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable and acceptable.