1. The defendant's notary public A belonging to the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office against the plaintiff was prepared on August 8, 2016, No. 456.

1. Facts recognized;

A. On August 8, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) paid total amount of KRW 33,900,000 to the Defendant in three installments by October 20, 2016; and (b) drafted a notarial deed stating the purport of the claim that shall be paid in addition to the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum on the unpaid amount if payment is delayed (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

B. By October 21, 2016, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant a total of KRW 29,079,000,000, and the Plaintiff paid the Defendant a total of KRW 4,821,000 with respect to the debt of the notarial deed of this case and damages for delay calculated by the rate of KRW 15% per annum from October 21, 2016 to the date of full payment.

(hereinafter referred to as “the balance of the Notarial Deed of this case”).

From November 30, 2015 to June 30, 2016, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with a total of KRW 5,511,000 (hereinafter “instant transport cost”) and issued a tax invoice of the same amount.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings (including evidentiary number)

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) Determination as to the cause of claim 1) If the Plaintiff’s claim is set off against the Defendant’s claim for the remainder of the Notarial Deed with the instant transport payment claim against the Defendant, the remainder of the above claim is extinguished. Therefore, compulsory execution based on the instant Notarial Deed shall be denied. 2) According to the facts of recognition as to the establishment of the automatic claim, it can be recognized that the Plaintiff’s transport payment against the Defendant is KRW 5,511,00,000, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff

The defendant asserts that some of the transport costs of this case were repaid, and the remainder was set off against the defendant's damage claim against the plaintiff.

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statement Nos. 2-1 and 2 of the evidence, the Defendant repaid KRW 1,320,000 out of the transport price of this case to the Plaintiff on December 17, 2015, and the Defendant’s Plaintiff on the 31st of the same month.