1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 27,00,000 and KRW 10,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 17,000,000 from January 1, 2016.

1. The Plaintiff, as to the cause of the claim, seek against the Defendant the payment of the agreed amount of KRW 27 million and damages for delay.

Comprehensively taking account of the following facts: (a) the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and Nonparty C agreed to operate a joint project on June 26, 2015, with the trade name of “D”, and accordingly, the Plaintiff invested KRW 33 million; and (b) the Plaintiff shall, upon withdrawal from the joint project, pay KRW 27 million to the Plaintiff on September 15, 2015, remaining after subtracting the amount of loss of KRW 33 million from the Defendant’s loss of KRW 33 million from the said joint project; and (c) one million from the agreement to pay KRW 17 million to the Plaintiff until December 31, 2015, respectively, may be acknowledged as having agreed to pay the amount of KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff by May 27, 2016 (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

According to the above facts, with regard to the return of agreed amount, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 27 million and KRW 10 million from January 1, 2016 following the due date of payment, and with respect to the remaining KRW 17 million from May 28, 2016 following the due date of payment, and with respect to the remainder of KRW 17 million from May 28, 2016, each of which was served on the Defendant until June 3, 2016, 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following date until the due date of full payment.

2. The defendant's argument regarding the defendant's assertion that since the defendant suffered a loss of at least 6 million won per person due to the operation of the joint business, the defendant should accurately calculate the loss and settle the amount to be returned. However, as long as the agreement of this case is not null and void or cancelled regardless of the amount of actual loss caused by the joint business, it is reasonable to view that the defendant bears the obligation to pay the agreed amount. Thus, the above argument by the

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.