2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On March 30, 2010, the Defendant prepared a notarial deed setting up security for transfer to automobiles of the said industrial company as security for lease deposit of KRW 100 million against D, the representative of C industrial company (hereinafter referred to as “industrial company”) and the Defendant’s above industrial company.

B. On November 17, 2011, the Defendant assumed debt amounting to KRW 300 million between F and the Plaintiff because the management of the foregoing industrial company, which was operated under the name of E, is difficult, and F, takes over the above industrial company’s debt amounting to KRW 300 million. However, the Defendant transferred the claim amounting to G with respect to which the said industrial company was substantially operated by the said company due to the said company’s fraud, and used the claim amounting to KRW 80 million, which the Defendant received from

The business transfer contract was concluded with the purport that the claims for the refund of deposit are transferred to the plaintiff and the defendant and F will liquidate the partnership business.

C. The Plaintiff, on November 17, 201 and December 22, 201, remitted a total of KRW 45 million to the Defendant, and the Defendant again delivered this to F and used it as the operating fund of the said industrial company.

On the other hand, at the time of transferring the claim for the refund of the deposit of this case, the Plaintiff and F knew that the rent for one-year equipment was overdue due to the dispute between the Defendant and G.

E. Until June to July 2012, the Plaintiff and F had been in arrears with equipment rent while operating the said industrial company, and the Plaintiff left the same business relationship with him/her, and F left the same business relationship with him/her until December 2012, and the Defendant directly operated G prior to the transfer of the said industrial company between March and April 2013.

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1, 2, No. 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The primary assertion is set-off by the Defendant’s acquisition of the Defendant’s claim for the refund of the deposit from the said industrial company, while the Defendant received the Defendant’s claim for the refund of the deposit from the said industrial company, the obligor, and the Defendant did not notify the assignment of the claim to the said industrial company.