1. The Defendant’s KRW 1,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from July 25, 2015 to January 26, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 23, 2014, the Plaintiff agreed to divorce between C and the Busan Family Court at the mediation date of the instant case No. 2014ddan17615, 2014ddan203218, and that both the Plaintiff’s criminal complaint (liver, assault, etc.) against C and the Defendant should not be held liable for civil and criminal liability on the grounds of the divorce, etc. in the future.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant divorce conciliation”). B.

On November 29, 2014, the Defendant rendered a bath to the Plaintiff, such as “unborn year and returned to the Plaintiff,” on the road located in Busan Dong-gu, Busan.

C. In relation to this, the Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant as a crime of defamation (No. 2015 type No. 23361 at the Busan District Prosecutors' Office), and the Defendant filed a complaint against the Plaintiff as a crime of injury around January 28, 2015.

(Supplementary District Prosecutors' Office 2015No. 24195). In relation to the above case, on June 1, 2015, the criminal conciliation procedure agreed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to revoke the complaint against the other party.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant criminal conciliation”). / [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 9, 11, 14, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The defendant's defense against the defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case against the defendant is unlawful by putting the benefit of protection of rights, since the plaintiff agreed not to hold the defendant accountable for civil or criminal liability in the procedure of divorce mediation and criminal conciliation of this case.

B. The effect of the non-committee agreement in the divorce conciliation of this case reaches only between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, who are the parties to the conciliation, and in the criminal conciliation of this case, the Plaintiff agreed to withdraw the criminal complaint against the Defendant. As such, each of the evidence Nos. 9 and Nos. 1 through 3 cannot be deemed as the non-committee agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's main defense.

3. The cause of the action.