1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 11,755,200 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from May 15, 2012 to November 12, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that engages in regular route cargo and ordinary route cargo transportation business with the trade name of “C”, and the Defendant is a company that engages in tin-to-face manufacturing and sales business.

B. Upon the introduction of D, the Plaintiff transported tin in E mine, F mine, etc. from 2006 to 3.2012, and transported tin in the agricultural feed plant located in the Jeonbuk Kim (hereinafter “Seoul Agricultural Cooperative”) from E mine, F mine, etc., and recovered tin again from the above plant to transport tin in the above E mine, etc.

C. 1) G, the representative director of the Defendant, filed a complaint against D and the Plaintiff on the criminal facts that “The Defendant has paid the blank and transportation expenses if he and D were to recover the blank and the Plaintiff.” However, having knowledge of the fact that G did not accurately collect the blank and would charge the transportation expenses, by deceiving G in a way that claims the transportation expenses were filed, rather than the blank and collected,” D were indicted as a crime of fraud and attempted fraud. On November 13, 2014, the first instance court failed to use the blank and short of tin as tin, and was sentenced to KRW 30,00,000 from 0 to 30,000,000,000 from 20,000, and received the total of KRW 30,000,000,000 from G by claiming for transportation expenses from 20,000 to 30,000,000,000 from G from 2, 201, and 30,01,0,0.

The Daejeon District Court 2013Kadan1976). D filed an appeal against the above judgment, and the appellate court held on September 6, 2015 that D'D' is a smuggling vacancy is tin.