A. The plaintiff is a person who aims at supporting various activities of children and juveniles, and the defendant is a person who runs a vehicle transport business.

B. The Plaintiff entered into a bus lease agreement with the Defendant for the operation of a vehicle in a domestic travel area (hereinafter “instant agreement”) as follows.

The contract amount on October 8, 2015, the date of operation of the operating section of the contract date - The amount of the on-site learning Ulsan - the 12 million Won on October 20, 2015 on October 120, 2015, Daegu, the amount of three hundred and twenty million won on October 24, 2015, Daegu, the amount of three hundred and twenty million won on-site learning on October 20, 2015 - the Independence Hall of Korea - the Independence Hall of Korea - the Independence Hall of Korea - the Independence Hall of Korea - the amount of six hundred and twenty thousand won on-site learning on October 20, 2015; < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 266595, Oct. 31,

C. The Plaintiff received a written claim under the name of the Defendant seeking the payment of transportation expenses under the instant contract and remitted the total amount of KRW 19.9 million to the deposit E bank account in the name of the deposit owner E (F) on October 13, 2015, KRW 250,000,000 on October 26, 2015, and KRW 1,62 million on November 3, 199.

E From July 22, 2015 to the same year

9. up to 17. G's children who were the Defendant's intra-company directors.

E. On December 10, 2015, the Defendant received KRW 18 million out of the transportation cost under the instant contract from G to the Agricultural Cooperative Account under the name of the Defendant (H) and returned it to the Plaintiff on the same day.

On December 23, 199 of the same year, the Plaintiff deposited the above transportation cost of KRW 19.9 million with the above Defendant’s account again, and the Defendant returned the above KRW 19.9 million to the Plaintiff on December 28, 201 of the same year.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 3 (including where there is a satisfy number), the purport before oral argument

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that there is no obligation under the contract of this case since the transportation cost under the contract of this case was paid lawfully to the defendant, the defendant is recognized to have received the above transportation cost of KRW 19.9 million from the plaintiff, but for the issuance of the defendant's tax invoice, not only the above transportation cost of KRW 19.9 million but also the amount including value-added tax of KRW 10% shall be paid from the plaintiff.