1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is residing in the formation of Pyeongtaek-do.

A person who escaped from North Korea around August 2013, and the defendant is a person who assists North Korean defectors to enter the Republic of Korea.

B. On October 2015, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant on the following (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with the Defendant: (a) that “the Defendant helps the Defendant to escape from North Korea of three family members living in North Korea to China and enter the Republic of Korea; and (b) in return for the success, the Plaintiff would pay the Defendant KRW 39,000,000 per head to the Defendant totaling KRW 13,000 per head (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

C. Around October 6, 2015, three family members of the Plaintiff were the Defendant’s desire to enter the country of North Korea and China’s border in the Chinese Peninsula, and thereafter, entered the Republic of Korea around November 12, 2015 through the land and Thailand in China.

On October 17, 2015, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 29,500,000 to the Defendant on October 17, 2015 (28,000,000 out of the above money, which is part of the instant arrangement and paid KRW 1,50,000 to the Plaintiff’s partner as travel expenses). The remainder of the agreement amounting to KRW 11,000,000 (39,000,000 - 28,000,000) was paid to the Plaintiff’s partner at the time of arrival of the Plaintiff’s partner in the Republic of Korea.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 2 and 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The agreement of this case where the defendant, a South Korean resident, tried to enter the country to China and Thailand of the plaintiff's family living together with North Korean residents by purchasing the border guard by disregarding the relevant legal procedures (such as the issuance of a passport or visa or the purchase of a visa, etc. without going through the procedures for the examination of entry into and departure from the country), constitutes a juristic act contrary to social order under Article 103 of the Civil Act, and thus, is null and void. The amount of KRW 28,00,000 paid to the defendant shall not be claimed as illegal consideration under Article 746 of the Civil Act.