1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 1,800,609 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) for KRW 1,800,609 and its amount from July 15, 2015 to April 5, 2017.

1. Under the underlying facts, the following facts are either not disputed between the parties, or acknowledged in full view of Gap's evidence 1 to 7, Eul's evidence 4 to 6, the witness C's testimony, and the court's inquiry of the fact to the defendant Internet Co., Ltd., and there is no counter-proof.

The Plaintiff was running a freight forwarding business with D using a transaction network program that connects a truck driver with a truck driver to a truck user.

B. On December 31, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to operate the said business at an investment rate of 50:50, and agreed to evaluate D’s assets held by the Plaintiff as KRW 60,000,000, and the Defendant paid KRW 30,000 to the Plaintiff, thereby making the Defendant’s investment in the said business. However, the Plaintiff agreed to the effect that: (a) the Plaintiff’s personal circumstance or for any other reason, if the parties were not to participate in the management right and retire, 70% of the UN fixed assets will be given to the other party; and (b) the parties who retire from the said business may bring about the remaining 30% of the fixed assets.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant trade agreement”). C.

After receiving KRW 30 million from the Defendant, the Plaintiff closed the previous business registration under the Plaintiff’s name, and changed the license for trucking transport brokerage business (hereinafter “business license”) under the Defendant’s name, and re-registered the business registration under the Defendant’s name. The name of the representative telephone and the name of the lessee under the lease agreement was also changed.

Around June 26, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the fact that he/she had been running a business as such, that he/she was “to reverse the instant agreement on the grounds of the Defendant’s breach of contract,” and accordingly, the Defendant sent an answer to the effect that he/she was “to reverse the instant agreement on the grounds of the Plaintiff’s breach of contract,” and that he/she was “to reverse the instant agreement on the grounds of the Plaintiff’s breach of contract” around June 30, 2015.