1. Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) C: (a) KRW 20,000,000 against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from August 1, 2015 to June 2, 2017.

1. Determination as to the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff served as a management adviser of D Co., Ltd., and Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”).

(2) On April 27, 2015, Defendant C-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-U-A-A-A-U-A-A-U-A-A-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-

3) As a result of the briefing session, six companies, including the Plaintiff’s advisory companies, agreed to jointly participate, and the project was to promote the project by withdrawing KRW 200 million from the service cost of the above business. However, the Defendant C was voluntarily promoted. Accordingly, Defendant C was dismissed from E before May 2015. However, the Plaintiff was unaware of such circumstances, and Defendant C was unaware of that circumstances, and Defendant C was unaware of that circumstances, thereby remitting KRW 30,00,000 to the bank account of Defendant B, a child of Defendant C, to the effect that “the Plaintiff did not pay only the service cost.”

5 The Plaintiff knew that he belonged to Defendant C, and sought the return of KRW 30,000,000, and the Defendant C would return KRW 20,000,000 until July 31, 2015.

“The cash custody certificate was prepared and awarded, and the remainder 10,000,000 won was promised to return to:

6) Defendant B had a duty to return KRW 30,00,000, which was remitted to his account without any justifiable reason, and Defendant C had a duty to return the amount of KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff. As such, Defendant C had a duty to return the amount of KRW 30,000 to the Plaintiff. (b) The Plaintiff’s assertion that the evidence submitted by Defendant C alone belongs to the Plaintiff and received KRW 30 million is difficult to recognize.

2. However, in conclusion, the plaintiff's assertion is the defendant.