1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall pay 16,00,000 won to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its payment from November 28, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 18, 2012, the Plaintiff was designated as the project implementer C on October 14, 2013 from Jeonyang-gun, Jeonyang-gun, and was authorized and publicly notified of the implementation plan on March 14, 2013.

B. On May 19, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the consultation and purchase of KRW 300/3,570, out of 11,802 square meters of forests and fields E 11,802 square meters of forests and fields, F field 175 square meters, G field 4407 square meters in total (hereinafter the instant contract) and paid KRW 185,000,000 for down payment to D on the same day.

C. On August 19, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant, a proxy of D on the date of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, stating that “the payment of KRW 55 million to the Defendant by August 19, 2012, separate from the above sales amount, was made, and issued a cash custody certificate to the Defendant (hereinafter the instant agreement), and paid KRW 5 million to the Defendant on the same day.

After the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff immediately paid KRW 74 million out of the instant sales amount to D on May 22, 2012, upon receiving a request to increase the sales amount from the Defendant Company, and on June 15, 2012, the Plaintiff additionally paid KRW 11 million out of the instant sales amount to the Defendant.

E. Since then, the Plaintiff filed a ruling of expropriation of the said real estate, etc. with the Jeonnam Regional Land Expropriation Committee on September 27, 2013 and deposited KRW 191,491,370 in total amount of compensation for expropriation of the said real estate as the depositer D on November 11, 2013, with the Seoul District Court No. 8770 on September 11, 2013, under the purport that “the said real estate shall be expropriated as of November 11, 2013.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 9, Eul evidence 1 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is asserted as follows, and the Plaintiff seeks payment of KRW 16 million against the Defendant as the principal lawsuit.

- The Defendant participated in the process of consultation on the conclusion of the instant trading contract as a D’s agent, and the said real estate is in that process.