1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff alleged that he leased the building to the defendant in the past.

In relation to the above lease, the Defendant stated that “the Plaintiff has an objection to the omission of a tax return on rent in the competent tax office,” and demanded the Plaintiff to pay the money in total to the Defendant twice on November 2009, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 13 million to the Defendant on two occasions around December 2009.

As such, the Plaintiff paid KRW 13 million to the Defendant by the Defendant’s coercion, and thus, the Plaintiff cancelled this and sought the refund of KRW 13 million (and damages for delay).

B. As alleged by the Plaintiff, the fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 13 million to the Defendant does not conflict between the parties or can be acknowledged by the entry of the evidence No. 1.

However, there is not sufficient evidence to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff paid the money as above by the Defendant’s coercion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is not accepted.

2. The plaintiff's claim of this case must be dismissed as it is reasonable.

The judgment of the first instance is unfair by rejecting the lawsuit in this case, but it is recognized that the first instance court has tried to the extent that it can render a judgment on the merits, and thus, it is decided to render a judgment on the merits directly in accordance with the proviso to Article 41

However, in this case where only the plaintiff appealed, the court of first instance cannot revoke the judgment and dismiss the plaintiff's claim against the plaintiff, who is the appellant, under the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration. Therefore, only the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.