1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 10,00,000, and KRW 5% per annum from May 27, 2013 to July 1, 2015, and complete payment from the following day.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 20, 2012, the Defendant filed a complaint against the Plaintiff on charges of rape. The content of the complaint was that: (a) from February 2012 to February 2012, the Plaintiff, who met at a middle school alumni group, was raped several times; and (b) the Plaintiff, who continued to marry by the Plaintiff’s strong pressure, was divorced from the Defendant’s husband; (c) the Plaintiff was divorced from the Defendant’s husband; and (d) the Plaintiff unilaterally discontinued the contact with the Defendant.

B. Upon the Defendant’s complaint, the Plaintiff was investigated five times from January 8, 2013, and investigated by the prosecution two times. During that process, the Plaintiff’s spouse filed a complaint for multiple offenses.

On July 16, 2013, the Plaintiff was subject to a decision on the charge of rape, injury resulting from rape, etc., and the Defendant’s application for adjudication was dismissed on February 28, 2014. The Plaintiff was prosecuted on the charge of adultery, and the Defendant was guilty of false charges of rape, even though he/she had sexual intercourse under the agreement with the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor, one year of suspended sentence, eight months of imprisonment with prison labor, and two years of suspended sentence (Seoul District Court Decision 2013Da3885 decided April 9, 2014), and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Gap evidence No. 14, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4 and 6 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence and scope of liability for damages;

A. According to the above facts of recognition, since the defendant did not have the plaintiff for the purpose of having the plaintiff punished, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages incurred by the defendant.

B. The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 7.4 million for property damage caused by the Defendant’s filing of a complaint, since the Plaintiff paid KRW 4.4 million for the retainer fee and KRW 3 million for the contingent fee.

According to the facts of recognition as above and the statements in Gap evidence 6 and 7, the plaintiff.