1. C On December 19, 2017, with respect to KRW 40,00,000 deposited by the East Branch of the Busan District Court as Busan District Court Decision 2017 Geum2467.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. On May 7, 2015, the Plaintiff did not have the intent or ability to transfer the Plaintiff’s actual loan ownership. On or around May 7, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to the above amount by allowing the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff’s debt amounting to KRW 57 million on behalf of the Defendant, who is the victim, for the payment of KRW 57 million in lieu of the Plaintiff’s debt, and for the transfer of ownership upon receipt of KRW 30 million after the completion of the construction.

On January 18, 2017, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months for the following summary of fraud with respect to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) at the Busan District Court’s Dong Branch branch branch.

(Subsan District Court 2016 High Court 2329). (b)

During the appellate trial of the above case, the plaintiff appointed the lawyer C belonging to D as a defense counsel and tried to make an agreement or deposit with the defendant, but all of the defendants failed to comply with it.

C. Accordingly, on September 12, 2017, the Plaintiff had the said defense counsel keep a total of KRW 40 million for the repayment of damages to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant money”). On September 12, 2017, the said defense counsel sent to the Defendant a written notice stating that “I would immediately pay the said money if I request the said attorney to pay the money within one year from the money (not later than September 15, 2018) from the money.”

On October 13, 2017, the Defendant appeared as a witness on the trial date of the above appellate case, and responded to the purport that “the Plaintiff cannot receive the custody money of this case that the Plaintiff left to his defense counsel” from the said defense counsel, and that “the custody money of this case cannot be received at the time of partial transfer of the amount of damage.”

E. The appellate court of the instant case rendered on November 3, 2017.