1. It is confirmed that each obligation described in the separate sheet between the plaintiff and the defendant does not exist.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, a company running the “C” (hereinafter “instant exchange”), which is an exchange mediating the transaction of encryption, etc., established an account for encryption transaction (Account Number E; hereinafter “instant account”) in D Co., Ltd.

B. The instant Exchange users, using the instant account, allow the transaction of encryption.

In other words, the instant exchange users, after transferring won currency to the instant account, manage the said funds through their own account opened in the instant exchange, and purchase the said funds with the said funds, are transferred to the account of the cryptist seller. From this point of time, the seller may purchase another cryptist or apply for cash withdrawal while managing the said funds. In the event of an application for cash withdrawal, the Plaintiff transfers the said funds from the instant account to the account of the seller’s personal account.

C. On April 2, 2019, the Defendant was subject to the singishing crime from a person under the name of the deceased, and remitted a total of KRW 144,80,000 to F, etc. as listed below, but did not recover the remainder, even though the Defendant reported to the police and recovered KRW 25,595,015.

On the other hand, the person who was dissatisfy in name transferred KRW 124,50,000 among the money that the defendant remitted in the name of F to the F account in the name of F, and purchased and withdrawn the encryption using it.

On April 2, 2019, 2019: (a) the Defendant’s deposit account holder of the other party’s deposit bank deposited in the Defendant: (b) G Bank H 10,000,000 on April 2, 2019; (c) F 48,00,000,000 I Bank F 48,000,000 on April 2, 2019; (d) J Bank K 16:80,000,00 on April 2, 2019; (c) F 48,00,000,000 I Bank F 48,00,000,000 on April 2, 2019; and (d) 16:53 I Bank F 29,00,000,000 in total;

D. Meanwhile, the Defendant was investigated by the competent police station on April 3, 2019, and Article 3 of the Special Act on the Prevention of Loss Caused by Telecommunications-based Financial Fraud and Refund of Loss (hereinafter “Telecommunications Fraud Refund Act”).