1. The Defendant’s KRW 2,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from December 13, 2016 to August 23, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 17, 2010, the defendant's office of public prosecutor's office "in Daejeon District Public Prosecutor's Office" was the same year from the defendant on March 8, 2006 and the same year.

4.2. 30 million won, and the same year.

7. 31.20 million won, May 21, 2007, and the sum of KRW 20 million on May 21, 2008, and KRW 168 million on May 21, 2008.

'The complaint of this case' is to the effect that 'the complaint of this case' is filed by the plaintiff.

B) B. The Plaintiff filed the instant complaint, etc., and the Daejeon District Court 201Kadan248, 2641 (in the case of a consolidation fraud, January 20, 2012, hereinafter referred to as “the instant fraud” against the Defendant by the said court, as follows.

(1) The Plaintiff was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for fraud of KRW 1,12,030,536 against and C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed with the Daejeon District Court 2012No329, but was sentenced to dismissal on November 7, 2013, and the said judgment was finalized on November 15, 2013.

1. On March 8, 2006, the Plaintiff made a false statement to the victim’s Defendant stating that “The Plaintiff would purchase 997 square meters of real estate in the Jung-gu Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, by purchasing the said real estate as forest and field. The market price gains can be seen if the real estate was purchased and sold after changing its form and quality to the site. However, if the real estate was leased KRW 50 million, the Plaintiff would pay a high interest on the principal borrowed by selling the said real estate and interest thereon.”

However, in fact, the Plaintiff did not have any means to invest in real estate, and was not able to purchase real estate as above and sell it by changing its form and quality. Since part of the money borrowed from the Defendant was considered to be used for other purposes, such as living expenses or office operation expenses, the Plaintiff did not have any intent or ability to return the principal and the profits to the Defendant even if he borrowed them from the Defendant.

The Plaintiff, as such, was urged by the Defendant and was delivered KRW 50 million to that effect by the Defendant.

2. On April 2, 2006, the Plaintiff is in the Daejeon-gu G Apartment Building around Daejeon-gu.