A. The Plaintiff is a stock company with the purpose of manufacturing, repairing, and leasing industrial machinery and equipment.

From November 1, 1999 to February 2, 2018, the Defendant served as the employee belonging to the Plaintiff; from around 2010 to the time of retirement, the service team leader was in service; and the Plaintiff was in service, such as checking the receipt of the report on the failure of the on-board vehicles produced by the Plaintiff and allocating machinery repair work to the team members.

B. From around 2008, the Plaintiff supplied D Co., Ltd. through C (hereinafter “D”) with the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

C. From 2010 to 2010, the Defendant issued a tax invoice to C under the name of the business entity called “E”, and received the total amount of KRW 396,813,450 from May 13, 2010 to May 23, 2018, as shown in attached Table 1.

Until December 31, 2012, the Plaintiff had a dualized structure that provides the service through the Plaintiff’s service agency, including the Plaintiff’s publication of the database service, the Plaintiff’s direct service through the Plaintiff’s employees, and the F (hereinafter “F”). From January 1, 2013, the Plaintiff changed its internal policy by directly providing the database service.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 3 and 5 evidence (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the assertion that the Defendant’s assertion was based on the premise that G died on September 28, 2014 due to the Defendant’s mistake during the period of claiming the parties’ assertion, the Plaintiff’s assertion is grounded on the premise that G died on September 28, 2011.

(A) The money deposited into the E account from May 13, 2010 to May 23, 2018 is the service payment that the Plaintiff received from D in return for the provision of a safeguard service.