1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim claims filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) B are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit;

1.The following facts shall be without dispute between the parties:

On March 14, 2015, the Plaintiff’s staff D had been in contact with the Plaintiff’s store, and the fire was transferred to the office of Nonparty E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”).

B. Accordingly, the non-party company filed a lawsuit seeking damages against the Plaintiff (In Incheon District Court Decision 2015Da10167). The above court rendered a judgment in favor of the non-party company, and both the non-party company and the Plaintiff appealed against the above judgment. The conciliation was concluded in the appellate court.

(Seoul High Court 2016Na207852). (c)

On the other hand, Defendant B entered into a contract with the non-party Company for the waste disposal and repair work of the office, issued a tax invoice under the name of the Defendant C, and prepared and executed a written statement with the same content to the non-party Company, and the non-party Company submitted the written statement of Defendant B in

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the cause of the principal claim. The Defendants conspired to pay waste treatment costs in collusion, and even if the Plaintiff appeared and testified as a witness, they committed an unlawful act, such as refusing to testify. Therefore, the Defendants are liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages arising from the above unlawful act.

B. The summary of the Defendant B’s assertion is the cause of counterclaim, and the Plaintiff forced the Defendant B to post a telephone, and to make a false statement.

Inasmuch as the Plaintiff recorded a telephone call without consent, and filed a lawsuit against Defendant B, etc., the Plaintiff is liable to compensate for mental damage suffered by Defendant B due to such unlawful act.

3. Determination

A. The evidence of the Plaintiff’s submission of judgment on the claim is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendants committed a tort against the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.