1. The part concerning the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance, which exceeds the following part ordering payment.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

The defendant is a corporation established with the objective of promoting the sound development of Smarket and promoting the promotion of welfare among its members.

The Plaintiff, from January 2006 to November 201, was in general in charge of the Defendant’s overall duties while serving as the president of the Defendant.

Around January 10, 201, the Plaintiff drafted the relevant criminal case and the instant agreement, in the Defendant’s office, concluded a mutual co-ordination negotiation with the New World Ear in relation to Emart shop occupants, and embezzled KRW 700,000,000 from the New World Emart to January 10, 2011, while receiving 70,000,000 from the Defendant’s Agricultural Cooperative Account (D) and kept for the Defendant for business purposes, upon receiving a request from the Plaintiff’s East E to promptly lend business funds, and then, disbursed KRW 40,00,000 from the said Agricultural Cooperative Account to E at will, and then, from around that time to February 23, 2011, arbitrarily consumed KRW 230,000 in total three times in accordance with the attached list of crimes as shown in the attached Table.

H on March 14, 2011, the amount of KRW 90,000,000, out of the amount of embezzlement Nos. 3 140,000,000 in [Attachment Table 3], was deposited and returned to the Defendant’s account.

On December 19, 201, the Plaintiff embezzled KRW 50,000 with the Plaintiff’s credit union account (F) and KRW 10,000 with the Plaintiff’s credit union account without returning it to the Defendant, while returning KRW 60,000,000 to the Plaintiff’s credit union logistics center construction site from the land owner on December 19, 201.

G on January 2, 2012, KRW 30,000,000 out of the above embezzlement amount of KRW 60,000,000, and the Plaintiff deposited the remainder of KRW 30,000,000 on March 2, 2012 to each Defendant’s account and returned it.

From January 2014, the Plaintiff began to undergo an investigation by an investigative agency on the suspicion of occupational embezzlement and embezzlement, and the Plaintiff is between the Defendant and the Defendant.