1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 20,800,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from December 9, 2014 to November 11, 2015; and (b) the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around June 2013, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant that the Plaintiff is running a construction business in Vietnam to arrange for marriage with Vietnam women, and the Defendant promised to arrange for marriage with the Plaintiff.

B. Upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff paid KRW 20,800,000 to the Defendant on June 4, 2013; KRW 2,300,000 on June 21, 2013; KRW 5,000,000 on July 9, 2013; KRW 20,50,000 on July 30, 2013; and KRW 5,000,000 on June 4, 2013.

C. The Plaintiff left Vietnam and went through marriage with Vietnam Women C (hereinafter “C”). D.

On the other hand, on October 18, 2013, C applied for the issuance of the visa for marriage emigration to a Korean consul stationed in Vietnam, and on the grounds that C became aware of the marriage applicants in the above application, C entered as “D to operate the visa in Donge”. The consul in charge of the above visa review verified that C operated the brokerage company in D currency, and determined that C prepared false details of introduction, and rejected C’s issuance of the visa.

C was ultimately unable to enter the Republic of Korea.

E. The act of mediating illegal marriage in Vietnam is a tort that imposes a fine of 20,000,000 dong(VND) from 10,000 to 20,000 dong(VND).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including paper numbers), witness D's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above facts, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into an international marriage brokerage contract between the plaintiff and the defendant. Since the plaintiff and the defendant were sexual intercourse between the plaintiff and the defendant, they have to enter the Republic of Korea so that they can enter the Republic of Korea and enter the Republic of Korea and have a substantial marital life, but failed to perform such obligations by negligence, so the plaintiff is liable to compensate for the damages caused by the plaintiff.

In this regard, the defendant did not enter into an agreement on international marriage brokerage with the plaintiff, and was engaged in business in Vietnam.