1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except where the defendant added the judgment as stated in Paragraph 2 below with regard to the matters for which the defendant asserts again in the trial of the court of first instance. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination on addition

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the agreement of this case was concluded by the Defendant on the premise that the agreement of this case was reached between the original Defendant and the Defendant, but the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay support fees to the Plaintiff on the premise that the agreement of this case was reached, not by divorce but by judicial divorce.

B. In full view of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the instant agreement was concluded on the premise of judicial divorce between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

Therefore, as long as the Plaintiff and the Defendant have judicial divorce, the Defendant is obligated to pay the support fees under the instant agreement to the Plaintiff.

The defendant's argument is without merit.

1) The instant agreement only contains the case number and case name (2016dhap1203, etc.) of a divorce lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendant at the right next to the title, and clearly reveals that the said divorce lawsuit is pending in the court of competent jurisdiction (U.S. District Court) in the last part of the instant case. Meanwhile, according to the evidence No. 2, the Plaintiff and the Defendant around the time of drafting the instant agreement, even though the said procedure is in the process of confirming the intention of divorce, it is recognized that the said procedure is under the jurisdiction of the Suwon District Court which is a separate legal cause, and there was no possibility that the number of the cases indicated in the instant agreement might be mistaken as indicating the procedure of confirming the intention of divorce, even if it is based on the terms outside the text of the law.2) The instant agreement uses the expression “after the confirmation of divorce” (Article 2(a) and “after the date of confirmation of divorce” (Article 4(4)).