1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On August 30, 2014, the Plaintiff’s assertion that: (a) agreed to transfer diversous Energy Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “diversous Energy”) between C and receive KRW 150 million; and (b) transferred 20,000 (hereinafter “instant shares”) to the Defendant; (c) did not receive KRW 150,000 from C.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff, around March 2015, cancelled the above agreement on the ground of the Defendant’s default. As such, the Defendant is obligated to return the instant shares to the Plaintiff as restitution according to the rescission of the contract.

2. The duty of restoration upon termination of the contract refers to the obligation of the parties to the contract to return the shares of this case to the Plaintiff in the same condition as the other party did not execute the contract. Therefore, in order for the Defendant to perform the duty of returning the shares of this case to the Plaintiff as the restoration upon termination of the contract, the fact that the party who transferred the shares of this case to

However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff is not sufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and rather, according to each of Gap evidence No. 12 and Eul evidence No. 6-3, the parties to the contract who transferred the shares of this case to the Defendant are acknowledged as D.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit to examine the remainder of the issue.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is dismissed as there is no reasonable ground.