1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 10 million to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and against this, from December 19, 2013 to June 26, 2014.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 22, 2005, the Plaintiff is the land located in Cheongju-gu E (69 square meters, hereinafter “instant land”) located in Cheongju-si, where the Plaintiff had been operated as a pastor by the Plaintiff as a pastor.

)A building and ground (130 square meters, hereinafter referred to as “instant building”)

The Defendant Council shall donate to the Defendant Council, and the Defendant Council shall be subject to a resolution of the General Assembly of the Korea Culture and Arts Institute (hereinafter referred to as the “F Official”)

(B) delivered the Plaintiff to operate, and agreed to transfer the Plaintiff to the Director of the Food Service Center until the Plaintiff withdraws from his office, and to guarantee this.

(2) On July 29, 2005, the Plaintiff, on the premise that the Plaintiff was appointed as the Director of the Ansan-gu Office on July 29, 2005, had full authority over personnel affairs and finance.

(b)The Assembly of the Korean President of the Korean President of the KIG General, following a resolution on July 29, 2005, permitted the operation of the KIG as an organization under the jurisdiction of the Defendant Council;

C. On August 11, 2005, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future of the Defendant Council on the instant land and buildings in accordance with the instant agreement.

After that, civil litigation was initiated between the plaintiff and the defendants as follows.

(1) On December 14, 2009, the Plaintiff: (a) forged a labor contract under the name of the representative of the Defendant Council; (b) submitted it to the court; and (c) received a payment order (Cheongju District Court 2009j7342) from the Defendant Council; and (d) received a compulsory decision to commence compulsory auction as to the real estate of the Defendant Council on January 8, 20

After that, the defendant council filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the claim, and the judgment of refusing to enforce compulsory execution based on the above payment order became final and conclusive on the grounds that the plaintiff decided to be paid as unpaid remuneration.

(2) On December 11, 2009, the Plaintiff’s provisional seizure against the Defendant Council by the same method. (3) On December 11, 2009, the Plaintiff’s provisional seizure against the Defendant Council.