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

A. On March 13, 2012, the Plaintiff (former B Agricultural Partnership) deposited KRW 50 million with the Defendant as the deposit money for the Pacific sales (hereinafter “instant deposit money”) and received a deposit receipt (Evidence A 1) from the Defendant.

나. 피고는 2012년 3월 초경부터 농업회사법인 주식회사 동부팜(변경전 상호 농업회사법인 주식회사 팜슨, 이하 포괄하여 ‘동부팜’이라 한다)과 사이에 파프리카 외상판매계약(이하 ‘이 사건 판매계약’이라 한다)을 체결하였고, 같은 해 7월 말경까지 위 계약에 따른 거래를 하였다.

C. On March 19, 2012, the same platform prepared the ledger of business partners stating the credit account sales, etc. with the Plaintiff, and on March 19, 2012, 5,6280,000 won was deducted from the account receivables.

Around April 21, 2012, the Dong Popport requested the Defendant to return the instant deposit on condition that the Defendant submit the guaranty insurance policy, and the Defendant has the same year.

6.5. Upon receipt of the surety insurance policy from the same farm, the deposit of this case was returned to the same farm.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 through 4, 6 through 9 (including each number), the witness C's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion deposited the instant deposited money at the Defendant’s request when concluding the contract of carriage with the Defendant. Since the contract of carriage was terminated in 2012, the Defendant is obligated to return the instant deposited money to the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant asserted that he deposited KRW 50 million in order to secure the claim for the price of goods under the sales contract of this case to the same farm.

The Plaintiff, who was responsible for the debt to the same platform, deposited the instant deposit to the Defendant instead of the same platform, and settled the corresponding debt to the instant deposit between the Plaintiff and the same platform.