1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 71,830,607 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from September 6, 2016 to the date of full payment.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) The Defendant is an entrusted breeding contract with B, ducks, and Saturdays (hereinafter “instant breeding contract”).

A) According to the instant breeding contract, B provided feed and pathology to the Defendant, and the Defendant supplied C with pathology and received breeding fees to B. (2) under the instant breeding contract, B paid advance payment in advance to the Defendant pursuant to the instant breeding contract, and if the Defendant supplied C’s ducks and native chickens to B, it traded by deducting the raising fees to be paid to the Defendant from advance payment. Accordingly, according to such method, the advance payment to be returned to B by the Defendant is KRW 71,830,607, when calculated as of February 26, 2015, when the Defendant and B were to complete the transaction.

3) The Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order (the District Court Decision 2016TTT 2016TT 9877 and the collection order) as to the above advance payment claim that B had against the Defendant based on the notarial deed as to the claim for sales proceeds of earth and sand as to B. [The Plaintiff did not dispute over the grounds for recognition, entry in the evidence No. 1-8, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 71,830,607 and delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from September 6, 2016 to the date of full payment, which is the day after the copy of the instant complaint was served on the Defendant.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserted that the 25,000 water was buried and disposed of due to the outbreak of avian influenza while raising the earth and rocks in accordance with the instant breeding contract.

Although the Defendant, a farmer, should receive compensation due to burial, the Defendant proposed that B divide the compensation into 50:50, and the Defendant accepted the compensation in consideration of the circumstances in B, and the compensation that B promised to pay to the Defendant.