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 reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is as follows, with the exception of adding the following judgments as to the following arguments, which are emphasized by the plaintiff in the trial of the court of first instance, the court shall dismiss "the defendant" of 3 pages 3 to "D" and emphasizing the plaintiff in the trial of the court of first instance as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. As such, this Court shall

[Supplementary Judgment]

A. On February 19, 2005, the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion W and AA, her husband, recognized that the Plaintiff was the actual ownership of the instant friendship and received KRW 500 million deposit money from the Defendant and paid it to the Plaintiff. However, the Plaintiff drafted an agreement with the Plaintiff to withdraw the lawsuit filed against W (Seoul Northern District Court 2004Gadan53279) (hereinafter the instant agreement), and the Plaintiff voluntarily withdrawn the said lawsuit in accordance with the said agreement.

Since that, W had confirmed once again that W would pay KRW 500 million to the Plaintiff out of the sale price of the above Bana, and the Defendant also should pay KRW 1.5 billion to the Plaintiff, excluding KRW 500 million out of the sale price, by recognizing that W had illegally acquired the instant Bana, after which W prepared the instant letter of undertaking (Evidence 15-1 of the evidence No. 15).

However, if AA returns the original of the above agreement and the letter of commitment to the Plaintiff, it is true that the Plaintiff is not holding the original, but the Defendant prepares the above agreement and the letter of commitment.

Therefore, pursuant to the above commitment to pay 1.5 billion won as compensation for damages, the defendant must pay to the plaintiff the money stated in the purport of the claim as part of the above commitment.

B. In light of the circumstances alleged by the Plaintiff or the evidence additionally submitted in the trial, the existence of the original copy of the instant promise and its authenticity are insufficient to be recognized, and thus, it cannot be admitted as evidence.