1. The counterclaim of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit following an additional judgment shall be borne by the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

1. Ex officio determination on the legitimacy of the counterclaim of this case

A. According to Article 269(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, a counterclaim may be brought to the court in which the principal lawsuit is pending, not later than the closure of pleadings, only where it does not substantially delay the litigation procedures.

B. However, it is apparent in the record that the Defendant filed the instant counterclaim on November 6, 2017, which was later than October 2017, when the pleadings of the instant lawsuit were concluded. Moreover, it is highly likely that the instant counterclaim, which was already filed after the closure of the pleadings, would considerably delay the litigation procedures, at the time of the lapse of at least one year and ten months from December 31, 2015, when the instant lawsuit was filed, from December 31, 2015, which was later filed. Therefore, the instant counterclaim seems to be unlawful.

2. According to the conclusion, the counterclaim of this case is dismissed, and this court has omitted its judgment on the counterclaim of this case in the issuance of a judgment on November 17, 2017, and thus has rendered an additional decision in accordance with Article 212(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.