1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff operates D, an agent of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”), and the Defendant joined C in around 2006 and was in charge of D as the head of the business division in 2016, and retired from office around May 15, 2016.

I received 10,000,000 won in cash from D Company A on April 29, 2016.

The above amount is promised to be repaid by 31 May 2016.

B. On April 29, 2016, the Defendant prepared and rendered a cash custody certificate (hereinafter “instant cash custody certificate”) with the following content to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s judgment on the cause of the instant claim claims for the money agreed to be paid by the Defendant based on the cash custody certificate. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated by the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from September 6, 2016 to the date of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks, as well as the amount of KRW 10,000,000 as stated in the said cash custody certificate.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant asserts that there is no obligation to pay to the plaintiff since he borrowed 10,000,000 won from the plaintiff. However, the plaintiff's cause of the claim is seeking the payment of the agreed amount based on the cash custody certificate of this case. The fact that the defendant prepared the above cash custody certificate to the plaintiff does not conflict between the parties.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The Defendant: (a) the instant cash storage certificate was drafted by coercion, such as assault, intimidation, etc. by his company E (C Incheon Branch Head); and (b) the Plaintiff conspired with E, and thus, the agreement on the entry of the instant cash storage certificate was alleged to have been null and void or to have been revoked; (c) based on the aforementioned evidence, evidence No. 3, evidence No. 4-6, and evidence No. 10 (including additional numbers).