The defendant's KRW 171,100,000 to the plaintiff and 5% per annum from February 12, 2020 to September 9, 2020 to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 15, 2012, the Plaintiff agreed on the transfer amount of 10% (hereinafter “instant share transfer agreement”) of the shares of the Defendant and the Defendant C LLC located in China (hereinafter “SP”) located in the U.S. (hereinafter “SP”) with respect to the shares transfer amounting to KRW 1 million in the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter “instant share transfer agreement”). At the time, the Defendant agreed to acquire the said shares under the same conditions as the above share transfer agreement if the Plaintiff wishes to do so.

(hereinafter referred to as “this case’s agreement”). (b)

According to the agreement on the transfer of shares in this case, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant a total of KRW 500,000 won for the transfer of shares on October 31, 2012, KRW 300,000,000 for the People’s Union on November 13, 2012, and KRW 200,000 for the People’s Union on November 16, 2012.

C. On July 29, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant terminated the agreement on the transfer of shares of this case as the Defendant did not transfer the shares of this case, and filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the return of KRW 1 million in the People’s Republic of China’s Republic of China’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic

On January 17, 2018, the court of the above People's Court rendered a judgment that "the defendant returned to the plaintiff one million won for the People's Republic of China, and paid the People's Republic of China's Republic of China's 217,912.77 won for this funds" (hereinafter "the foreign judgment of this case") was affirmed on September 18, 2018.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 4, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Whether the amendment of the purport of the claim is lawful has been permitted by compulsory execution based on the foreign judgment of this case against the original defendant, but the defendant was unable to know that he had entered the Republic of Korea at the time of the above foreign lawsuit through a written response and did not know of the progress of the above foreign lawsuit. In accordance with the instant agreement, the claim of this case and the ground for the amendment