1. The Plaintiff’s return of provisional payment to the Defendant KRW 1,215,267 and the Plaintiff’s return of the provisional payment from January 11, 2018 to September 19, 2018.

1. On January 11, 2018, the Defendant paid KRW 1,215,267 to the Plaintiff on January 11, 2018 based on the judgment of the court of first instance ordering the obligation to return provisional payment, and the court of first instance dismissed all the Plaintiff’s claims. As such, a provisional execution declaration in the judgment of first instance became null and void. Accordingly, the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant damages for delay calculated at each rate of 5% per annum from January 11, 2018, which is deemed reasonable for the Plaintiff to dispute as to the existence or scope of the obligation to return provisional payment, from January 11, 2018, which is the date on which the provisional payment is to be received, to September 19, 2018, and from the next day to the date on which the repayment is to be made.

2. Conclusion, the Defendant’s motion for the return of provisional payment should be cited on the grounds of its reasoning. Since the judgment on the Defendant’s motion for the return of provisional payment was omitted in this judgment, the Defendant’s additional judgment as per Disposition is rendered pursuant to Article 212 of the Civil Procedure Act