1. As to KRW 165,616,00 among the Plaintiff and KRW 88,00,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 77,616,00 from April 4, 2014.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The status of the party is that the Plaintiff is engaged in the production, wholesale, etc. of hair products and welfare, and the Defendant was awarded a subcontract for the original production from the Plaintiff to the company engaged in the original manufacturing, etc.

C is an employee of the Plaintiff from April 25, 2003.

From December 1, 2010, the head of the parent-service division has been in charge of the affairs such as subcontracting and paying or recovering the cost by receiving orders from the customer as the head of the parent-service division.

B. The ordinary trade structure of the Plaintiff’s mother business division in charge of the transaction structure of the Plaintiff’s mother business is as follows.

Upon receiving an original supply order from a trader, the Plaintiff ordered the original unit production from the subcontractor company, such as the Defendant, and settled the subcontract price, and then had the subcontractor produce the original unit and deliver it to the Plaintiff or the Plaintiff’s trader, and receive the original unit supply payment from the trader.

C. The Plaintiff and the Defendant’s original production C made a false processing transaction using the following methods, thereby receiving the price of the pre-paid goods from the Plaintiff and defrauding it.

In other words, C introduced D, which is a personal shopping mall company, as if it were a professional fashion company (a company that supplies raw materials after being entrusted with the purchase, sealing, processing, etc.) of Scream Co., Ltd., a large clothing company (hereinafter “Scke”), to the Plaintiff, and ordered D to supply the raw materials in the name of the Plaintiff via D.

The plaintiff entered into a subcontract with the defendant to request the production of the original unit in accordance with the above order and paid the original unit production to the defendant in advance.

According to the prior agreement with C, the Defendant re-subcontracted the original production to E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E”) in which C actually operated, and paid all the original production cost that the Plaintiff received by advance payment.

However, the original cost that C received in advance is all F.