1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company engaged in research and development of information and communications apparatus, development services, software development, and manufacturing and selling business, and the Defendant is a company engaged in manufacturing and selling electronic components.

B. The Plaintiff owned 2,045,40 shares of common shares among the Defendant’s 4,770,000 shares (ordinary shares 4,020,00 shares) and transferred all shares owned by the Defendant around December 2012.

C. On December 26, 2012, the Defendant filed an application for commencing rehabilitation procedures with the Suwon District Court 2012 Gohap101, and subsequently decided on January 23, 2013 from the above court, but the rehabilitation procedure was abolished on December 5, 2013.

On October 25, 2016, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order claiming the refund of KRW 100,000,000, which is a part of the lease deposit of KRW 1,000,000,000 with the Suwon District Court Decision 2016Da2063, the Defendant issued a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) with the purport that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant delayed payment calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order to the day of full payment, and KRW 75,10,00,000 per annum from the day of delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order,” and the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the Plaintiff on November 8, 2016, and became final and conclusive on November 23, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 6 and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. At the time of the Plaintiff’s assertion on November 201, 2012, C, the representative director of the Defendant, requested D to sell the Defendant’s shares issued by the Plaintiff’s representative director D to the Defendant. The Plaintiff proposed to set off the Plaintiff’s share purchase-price claim against the Defendant and the Defendant’s claim for refund of lease deposit amounting to KRW 1,00,000,000 against the Plaintiff, and the Defendant’s loan claim amounting to KRW 700,000,000 against the Plaintiff. In response, the Plaintiff transferred all the above shares to the Defendant. The Defendant’s claim for refund of lease deposit against the Plaintiff against the Defendant on November 2