1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall pay 9,500,000 won to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its payment from January 10, 2004.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Determination as to the principal lawsuit

A. Basic facts 1) The Seoul Southern District Court case No. 2003Gaso266390 filed against the Defendant, which was the appellate case of Seoul Southern District Court No. 2004Na3371 (hereinafter “the previous lawsuit”).

(2) On October 14, 2004, the above court rendered a favorable judgment against the plaintiff on October 14, 2004 that the plaintiff lent KRW 5 million to the defendant and repaid KRW 1.5 million to the defendant, and that the plaintiff entrusted the debt collection amount of KRW 6 million to the defendant, and that the defendant, even after receiving KRW 6 million from C, made embezzlement by failing to return it. The defendant rendered a favorable judgment against the plaintiff to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 9.5 million and the amount at the rate of KRW 20% per annum from January 10, 2004 to the day of full payment. However, the defendant appealed as Supreme Court Decision 2004Da61563, Dec. 24, 2004; however, the appeal was dismissed and the above judgment became final and conclusive.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. Determination 1) The principal lawsuit of this case was instituted to suspend the completion of the final and conclusive judgment of this case. As such, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 9.5 million and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from January 10, 2004 to the date of full payment. 2) As to this, the defendant, notwithstanding the fact that the defendant did not commit a crime of defrauding or embezzlement against the plaintiff, he did not commit an offense of deceiving the plaintiff with perjury, and was subject to criminal punishment due to fraud and embezzlement. The plaintiff asserted that he did not prepare and submit a complaint differently from the facts in the previous lawsuit of this case in order to avoid receiving the money stated in the purport of the claim by fraud of the lawsuit of this case, or to avoid criminal punishment, and was sentenced to a favorable judgment by deceiving the court by submitting an erroneous criminal judgment and altered notification as evidence.