1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 250,000,000 as well as 15% per annum from February 22, 2019 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings);

A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in the photographing business, and G from October 1, 2014, at the building located in Suwon-si H located in Suwon-si, the instant wedding name was “I” and thereafter changed to “J”.

(B) A person who had been operating the instant wedding (hereinafter “instant wedding”).

B. On April 1, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with G and the instant wedding hall to take photographs by March 31, 2017 (in the absence of both notifications by 30 days before the contract is terminated, automatic extension for one year) and to receive settlement of accounts, and paid KRW 250,000,000, and the deposit was agreed to be returned at the same time as the contract is terminated.

C. On February 28, 2016, the Plaintiff drafted a “agreement on photographing” (Evidence A 1) with the same content as the Defendants.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”) D.

Until December 31, 2017, the Plaintiff taken photographs in the instant wedding hall.

2. Determination

A. In cases where the authenticity of the judgment document on the cause of the claim is recognized, the court shall, in principle, recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposition document, unless there is any clear and acceptable evidence to deny the content of the statement. There is a statement in the agreement to return KRW 250,000,000 paid by the Plaintiff upon the termination of the contract of this case on April 1, 2015, the fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 250,000,000 to G with the deposit, as seen earlier.

In addition, on December 31, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that the instant contract was terminated upon the conclusion of the agreement by receiving notification from the Defendants to terminate the instant wedding business, and the Defendants did not have any particular dispute.