1. The part concerning the counterclaim in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. Grounds for the court's explanation concerning this part of the judgment on the claim of the principal lawsuit are as follows.

In addition to the following parts, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it shall be quoted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

B. The defendant's defense was raised in the trial of the court of first instance to the effect that the defendant deposited KRW 27,818,770 in accordance with the judgment of the court of first instance.

The Defendant appears to have implicitly withdrawn the counterclaim by expanding the amount of the claim for a counterclaim to the extent of the amount of the claim for a offset against the amount equivalent to 1/2 of the Plaintiff’s retirement allowance claim against the Plaintiff in the first instance trial, but the claim for a offset against the amount of the damage claim which was raised in the first instance trial.

The effect of the performance due to the death and the provisional execution is not conclusive, but is only derived from the declaration of the provisional execution or the cancellation of the judgment on the merits in the appellate court, and therefore, the amount of the provisional execution was paid according to the judgment on the provisional execution of the first instance court.

Even if the appellate court decides the legitimacy of the claim without considering it as an appellate court.

(Supreme Court Decision 200Da560 Decided July 6, 200, etc.). According to the records in the instant case and evidence Nos. 20 of the Evidence Nos. 20, the following facts are acknowledged: (a) the Defendant actually provided the Plaintiff with KRW 27,818,770 on August 3, 2015 after the judgment of the first instance court was rendered; (b) deposited the Plaintiff with the fact that the Plaintiff refused to receive payment; and (c) attached the statement "as to the cause of deposit," "as to a provisional execution" to the cause of deposit; and (d) according to such acknowledged facts, the Defendant, the debtor of the first instance judgment, even though having taken the form of a deposit for payment, deposited the said money to be exempted from a compulsory execution based on a provisional execution attached to the judgment of the first instance court.