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. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around July 2012, the Plaintiff, which was legally disputed, was a member of the C Bank coal branch in order to obtain a loan for the appointment of an attorney-at-law. Around July 2012, the Plaintiff was introduced from the loan-at-law staff to the Defendant who was working as a certified judicial scrivener at the time. Around August 1, 2012, the Plaintiff agreed to appoint an attorney-at-law and proceed with the relevant litigation by appointing an attorney-at-law to the Defendant through consultation with the Defendant.

B. Afterwards, the judgment of Suwon District Court was rendered on July 1, 2013 in the case of claiming the return of unjust enrichment (2012 Gohap5393), and the Defendant returned KRW 35 million to the Plaintiff around August 2013.

C. On August 27, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed as Seoul High Court Decision 2013Na53825, and the appellate court also appointed an attorney-at-law and tried to proceed with the lawsuit. On August 27, 2013, the Defendant transferred the amount of KRW 20 million (excluding value-added tax of KRW 2 million) to the account known to the Defendant, the judgment dismissing the appeal was rendered on May 1, 2014, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on May 24, 2014 due to no further objection by the Plaintiff.

Meanwhile, on the other hand, the Defendant prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff a letter of payment stating that the said KRW 20 million will be paid by December 30, 2014, and that the said KRW 20 million will be paid by the date on which the payment was made. ② On July 11, 2014, the Defendant prepared and delivered a letter of payment stating that the Plaintiff would pay the aggregate of the interest and the value-added tax of the appellate court’s stamp, and ③ on December 29, 2014, the Defendant agreed to pay the said KRW 29.6 million by December 30, 2014, but the Defendant agreed to pay the said KRW 29.6 million by the date on which the money was not prepared, to be paid by January 23, 2015.

“Preparation and delivery of a note of payment” was made and delivered on January 6, 2015, and (4) on January 6, 2015, the letter of payment was drawn up and delivered to the effect that “The payment of KRW 29.6 million shall be made by January 30, 2015.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 5 evidence, Eul 2-2 and 3 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the main claim

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant.