1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The Plaintiff, as the principal lawsuit on April 15, 2015, sought confirmation of the absence of the obligation to return the investment amount under the Investment Agreement as of April 15, 2015, and the Defendant, as a counterclaim, claimed against the Plaintiff KRW 469,80,000 (i.e., claim to return the investment amount of KRW 209,800,000 agreed amount of KRW 190,000 agreed amount of KRW 190,000 agreed amount of KRW 190,000 and damages for delay.

The judgment of the first instance accepted the plaintiff's claim on the principal lawsuit and dismissed all the defendant's counterclaims.

On the other hand, the defendant filed an appeal only on 209,800,000 won of the counterclaim to return the counterclaim to the Supreme Court.

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance on the part of the defendant's counterclaim contract amount and the claim for the agreed amount became final and conclusive, it was excluded from the scope of the party's trial, and the court of the first instance will decide only on the defendant's counterclaim contract amount

2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the underlying facts is that the court’s “this court” in the 8th sentence of the first instance judgment is identical to the entry of “1. Basic Facts” in the first instance judgment, except for the addition of the following matters, since it is identical to the entry of “1. Basic Facts” in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The following shall be added to the 8th sentence of the first instance court:

G. On May 9, 2016, the Plaintiff filed the instant principal lawsuit and the instant counterclaim by asserting that the instant investment agreement was concluded primarily by the Defendant’s deception, and that it was revoked, and that the Defendant did not comply with the terms of the instant investment agreement. (ii) The Defendant asserted that the instant investment agreement was terminated on September 5, 2016, and filed the instant counterclaim claiming the refund of the investment amount.

3. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the Defendant is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff totaling KRW 359,800,000 (including KRW 150,000,000, as stated in the instant investment agreement).