1. Of the instant lawsuits, the part demanding the payment of KRW 148,500 shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remainder.

1. On July 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) divided the Plaintiff’s claim for the refund of the lease deposit worth KRW 130 million at the time of divorce and division of property; (b) provided that if the Defendant re-contributed, the Plaintiff and the Defendant shall pay KRW 65 million out of the above credit amount to the Plaintiff.

Since the defendant had been married again to fulfill the above conditions, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 65 million won and damages for delay and expenses for demand procedure.

2. Whether the part concerning the claim for the expenses of demand procedure is lawful, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 84,300 to the Defendant regarding the claim for the payment order of this case, but the amount disbursed as the expenses of lawsuit can be repaid after the judgment became final and conclusive, and there is no benefit to seek a separate lawsuit (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da68577, May 12, 2000). This part of the lawsuit is unlawful.

3. The Plaintiff’s claim for monetary payment is not sufficient to acknowledge that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the part concerning the Plaintiff’s claim for monetary payment, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion cannot be accepted.

4. Therefore, the part of the claim for the expenses of demand procedure in the instant lawsuit is dismissed, and the remainder of the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.