1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The parties' assertion

A. On July 2006, the Defendant received KRW 60,000,000 from the Plaintiff on August 8, 2006 and received KRW 60,000,000 from the Plaintiff on the basis of the false statement that it is necessary to transport small rights checks, certificates of deposit, gold ingots, etc., and received money from the Plaintiff. The Defendant did not commit so and acquired money.

The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 54,000,000 as damages for tort and damages for delay.

The agreement asserted by the Defendant was made on the condition that the Defendant’s signature and seal is affixed to the agreement, that the Defendant’s seal impression is attached to the agreement, that the Defendant obtains a cash custody certificate from the Defendant, and that the Defendant communicates with the Defendant. The above condition was not fulfilled, and thus, is invalid.

B. On February 5, 2008, the Plaintiff concluded a non-committee agreement.

2. Determination:

A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts may be acknowledged in the statements Nos. 1 and 2-1 and 2-2:

(1) On July 31, 2006, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant on February 5, 2008, and agreed not to file a civil or criminal lawsuit on August 7, 2006, including KRW 90,000,000,000 on August 7, 2006, and KRW 90,000,000,000 on August 8, 2006, the Plaintiff paid part of the Defendant’s early payment to the Defendant on August 5, 2006, and agreed that the balance should only be paid on the completion of the instant case on February 5, 2008, and both parties did not raise any objection for any reason as to the instant case, and agreed not to file a civil or criminal lawsuit (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

(2) On February 10, 2008, the Plaintiff prepared a letter of revocation of the complaint that the Plaintiff would revoke the complaint, since the Plaintiff received full payment of damages to the Defendant for the case of fraud.

(3) On April 17, 2008, a judicial police officer of the Seoul Gangseo-gu Police Station received a letter of revocation of complaint that the plaintiff paid 90,000,000 won to the defendant and received the full repayment of the case in fraud, and prepared a written opinion that there is no suspicion against the defendant. The prosecutor in charge shall be the prosecutor in charge.