1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from June 20, 2017 to January 24, 2018.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 28, 2011, the Plaintiff and C filed a marriage report, and two children under the chain.

B. C became aware of the Defendant, who was a university professor, while serving as a university professor.

C. From September 2016, C had a difficulty in returning home to the new wall after drinking. On October 14, 2016, the Defendant and C promised to use the Kakakao Stockholm message at the time of drinking, and C went home on that day, but C returned to the new wall at 4th of the following day.

After that, the Defendant and C continued to drink with drinking while drinking alcohol at night, etc. Around December 2016, the Defendant continued to transmit pictures or locked photographs received from swimming clothes to C, and C sent to the Defendant a message regarding such photographs, such as “underage,” and “as soon as he or she is in the first half of the night,” etc.

E. Upon the above contact and contact between C and the Defendant continued, the Plaintiff and C were disputing parties, and C demanded that the Plaintiff not interfere with each other, and filed a divorce lawsuit against the Plaintiff around May 2017.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 7 (including a branch number), the whole purport of pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings. On the other hand, no one may record conversations between others that are not open to the public, and the recording of these conversations is prohibited from being used as evidence in trial proceedings (Articles 14 and 4 of the Protection of Communications Secrets Act), and Gap evidence No. 6 (recording file) are the Plaintiff’s recording of the conversations between Eul and the defendant, and Gap evidence No. 4 (Recording No. 4) cannot be used as evidence, since the recording of the conversations between the above recording file and the above recording

2. Determination as to the defendant's defense prior to the merits

A. On April 30, 2017, the Plaintiff of the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits prepared a letter of commitment against C not to cause any damage to the Defendant, and expressed his/her intent not to file a lawsuit against the Defendant, and thus, for the Defendant.