1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 250,000,000 and its KRW 50,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 250,000 from August 24, 2012, and KRW 200,00,000.

1. Basic facts A is an individual entrepreneur who produces and supplies a unique apartment sales household under the trade name of “C,” and the Defendant is the head of the management department of “C” and the head of the management department of “C.”

A borrowed KRW 250 million from the Defendant on June 19, 2012, KRW 14 million on July 23, 2013, KRW 40 million on July 31, 2013, and KRW 250 million on July 31, 2013.

A repaid to the Defendant a total of KRW 250 million on August 23, 2012, and KRW 250 million on September 11, 2013 (hereinafter “instant repayment”).

A, on October 2, 2013, upon filing an application for commencing rehabilitation procedures with this court on November 8, 2013, is currently undergoing rehabilitation procedures after receiving a decision on commencing rehabilitation procedures (this case No. 2013 group 111) and the Plaintiff was appointed as a manager of A.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant repayment act filed with the Defendant, a private money, immediately before filing an application for commencing the rehabilitation procedure, constitutes “an act of having the debtor know that it would prejudice any rehabilitation creditor or any rehabilitation secured creditor” under Article 100(1)1 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, and at the same time, constitutes “an act of extinguishing any obligation performed by the debtor after the payment is suspended,” under Article 100(1)2 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act, and the Plaintiff denies the instant repayment act. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay the repayment amount and damages for delay resulting from the instant repayment to the Plaintiff.

3. The phrase “an act of a rehabilitation company knowing that the rehabilitation creditor or rehabilitation secured creditor would damage the rehabilitation creditor or rehabilitation secured creditor” under Article 100(1)1 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act with respect to the cause of the claim not only the so-called fraudulent act of absolute reduction of the debtor’s general property, which is a joint security of the total creditor, but also the act such as repayment or provision of security to a specific creditor,