1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is as follows, and this case is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for modification and addition as follows.

(The plaintiff's assertion and the evidence submitted, including K's testimony, are all examined, it is reasonable to make the first instance judgment). He revises the "False" of 8 acts inside the 6th page of the first instance judgment to "we have found it false."

The 11th sentence of the judgment of the first instance shall be amended to "after lending" in the 12th sentence and 13th sentence.

After the judgment of the court of first instance on the 13th page 13, the defendant should be deemed to waive this part of the plaintiff's KRW 85 million in accordance with the agreement to cancel the joint business as of April 24, 2017.

“Although it is alleged to the effect that the Plaintiff renounced the above KRW 85 million, in light of the developments leading up to the conclusion of the above contract and its contents, etc., there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

“A defendant shall be added.” On 15 pages 20 of the first instance judgment, “the defendant shall be amended to “the plaintiff”.

2. Conclusion, the first instance judgment is justifiable, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

The Defendant submitted an application for resumption of pleadings on June 12, 2020, which was after the closing of argument, with the submission of the preparatory documents on June 12, 2020, but it is determined that the instant case had been sufficiently deliberated, such as five times including the examination of witness, etc., and the date for pleading has been proceeding at the appellate court. Therefore,

Furthermore, even if the reference documents submitted by the Defendant on June 15, 2020 were examined, it is difficult to reverse the above judgment.

.