1. The defendant shall pay 80,000,000 won to the plaintiff and 15% per annum from February 12, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

1. Grounds for recognition;

A. On February 18, 2014, the Defendant entered into an investment contract with B (the representative C; hereinafter “B”) under which the Defendant shall invest KRW 80,000,000 in connection with “D performance” (hereinafter “instant performance”) scheduled to be held in the astronomical Net Emnasium, and that the principal shall be guaranteed and a certain amount of profit shall be distributed.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

The Defendant explained the instant performance to the Plaintiff on the grounds that it was not capable of investing in the investment money, and the Plaintiff transferred the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 80,000,000,000 to the deposit account of the Plaintiff, February 20, 2014, and KRW 80,000,000,000 on February 21, 2014.

C. The Defendant demanded C to prepare a new contract by adding the Plaintiff to the Defendant as well as the Defendant as the instant contract party, but C rejected the request by stating that “the Plaintiff should not have any other person.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 13, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion lent KRW 80,000 to the Defendant around, and subsequently, invested KRW 80,000 upon being guaranteed the return of principal in preliminary case.

The defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 80,000,000 and damages for delay.

B. The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff directly lent or invested to B is not liable to the defendant.

3. Determination as to the cause of action

A. In full view of the following circumstances recognized based on the above facts and the purport of the entire pleadings, the plaintiff lent KRW 80,000 to the defendant, and even if not, it is reasonable to view that the plaintiff is the defendant and the other party is the defendant.

1 The defendant asserts that the plaintiff was directly lent to, or invested in, B, but the contract of this case was concluded between the defendant and B, and the investment contract between the plaintiff and B.