1. Of the part of the claim for reimbursement against the principal claim in the judgment of the first instance, the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff shall be deemed to have been paid.

The court's explanation of this case is identical to the reasoning in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, in addition to the dismissal of part of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows, since the reasoning in the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

【The part to be used in the judgment of the court below] The second part of the second part 15 and 16 “transfered” to “the defendant acquired all expenses, such as taxes, etc. incurred during the period operated by C from the main point of this case from C.”

Following the last “statement” of the second place of action, the “statement F of the first instance trial witness F and C” shall be added.

Under the third through 4th page, “a fact has existed.” The fact that C took over the main points of this case from C, and upon taking over the main points of this case, C’s obligation related to C including the tax, including the tax, is as seen earlier. The fact that C or the Defendant paid KRW 6,098,280 among the taxes imposed on the Plaintiff in relation to the main points of this case by December 6, 2013 to the Plaintiff during the period in which C or the Defendant was operating the main points of this case does not dispute between the parties. Thus, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the tax amount of KRW 6,098,280 and the delay damages therefor, which the Plaintiff acquired the right to reimbursement against the Plaintiff as the assignee or the person bearing the obligation for the main points of this case.

The fourth parallel 8’s “3,518,280 won” is deemed to be “32,518,280 won.”

Each “7,098,280 won” of heading 9 and 11 shall be deemed as “6,098,280 won.”

Part 4 of the first 10 line " February 14, 2015" means " February 5, 2015".

The phrase “this Decision, May 26, 2015,” set forth in Forms 12 and 13, i.e., “F., May 26, 2015, May 26, 2015, which is the date the first instance judgment is rendered for the above loan,” and the amount of the above large payment, which is February 18, 2016, which is the date the said judgment is rendered.”

No. 5 (15) was accepted, and all of the events occurred during which C had been operated with respect to the main points of this case.