1. The Defendant’s KRW 376,678,89, and the Plaintiff’s annual interest from August 23, 2017 to December 21, 2017, and the following.

The plaintiff and C have been living together in 1999 and maintained de facto marital relationship.

C Each provisional attachment was made on May 1, 2015, and May 20, 2015, to preserve the claim for division of property in accordance with the destruction of de facto marital relationship with respect to the land and its ground buildings, etc. owned by the Plaintiff (Seoul District Court Decision 2015 business group6049, 20059, 2015 business group6059).

On December 17, 2015, the Plaintiff sold each of the above real estate, etc. to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation in KRW 2,133,828,660. Around that time, the Plaintiff agreed with C to withdraw each of the above provisional seizure applications on the condition that C would receive KRW 800,000,000 out of the above purchase price.

Accordingly, the defendant received 800,000,000 won from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, and withdrawn the application for each provisional seizure on December 18, 2015.

C applied for a provisional attachment for the preservation of the claim for division of property following the destruction of de facto marital relationship with respect to each of the above real estate at the end of the year, and received the decision of provisional attachment on January 25, 2016.

On April 11, 2016, the Plaintiff and C drafted two copies of the agreement (hereinafter “instant agreement”) stating that “C shall return KRW 500,000,000,000,000 received from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, which shall be returned to the Plaintiff, prepare and deliver to the Plaintiff a written withdrawal of the application for provisional attachment regarding each of the above real estate, and thereafter the Plaintiff withdraws the criminal complaint and the claim for division of property against the Defendant.”

Around April 2016, the Defendant agreed with C to terminate the pension insurance contract that C entered into with Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd., and the Defendant keep the termination refund, but the Defendant acquired the termination refund from C for the purpose of keeping it in custody by using the method of collection through a collection order based on the promissory note notarial deed.

C is itself from Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd. on April 22, 2016.