The plaintiff and C are legally married couple who reported marriage on September 23, 2013.

The defendant was aware of the fact that the workplace partner C, who is a male father, and led to inappropriate relations, including sexual relations.

B From December 2013, it is time for B to lead to an inappropriate relationship with C (including a sex relationship) to the present, and promises not to meet or communicate with C after today.

In the event of a route, (1) all evidence shall be notified to the parents and the family-friendly relationship.

(2) inform the company and its persons of all evidence.

(3) defamation due to information shall not be liable to the person himself or herself, and shall not be responsible for such defamation.

(4) It does not have any contact with C, telephone conversations, text messages, e-mail, Kakaox, etc., and it shall be paid to A, even once, KRW 0 million per hour or on a delivery day.

On October 29, 2014, the Defendant prepared and delivered the following notes to the Plaintiff:

(hereinafter “instant agreement”). After the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming consolation money (U.S. District Court Decision 2014Da115902) against the Defendant due to an unlawful act, and submitted each of the above documents to the Defendant as a documentary evidence and set up by the Defendant’s coercion. However, the above court affirmed the Defendant’s unlawful act based on the above written statement, and rendered a judgment ordering the Defendant to pay consolation money of KRW 10 million and delay damages, which became final and conclusive as it is.

【In light of the fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 2, and 5, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant is liable to pay the agreed amount pursuant to the agreement of this case to the plaintiff, and the defendant's defense that the declaration of intention is revoked as a declaration of intention by duress is rejected in light of the circumstances that were rejected in the previous case.

Furthermore, when the defendant added the purport of the whole pleadings to the statements in Gap evidence 3 and 4, the same year as the defendant on May 20, 2015.

6.22. Recognizing that each C has met, it shall be recognized.