1. Defendant B’s KRW 37,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from September 1, 2012 to September 27, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Evidence A1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

A. On July 26, 2012, the Defendants agreed to pay KRW 51 million, not later than August 31, 2012, in cases where the amount promised to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of D investment is not paid as a couple’s company.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant agreement”). (b)

After the instant agreement, the Plaintiff received KRW 10 million from Defendant B on September 3, 2012, and KRW 4 million on March 23, 2013, and appropriated it for the repayment of principal.

2. The allegations by the parties and the judgment of this court

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed amount of KRW 37,000,000 (=51,000,000-10,000-4,000-4,000) and the delay damages, barring special circumstances.

B. Whether Defendant C’s instant agreement was made by coercion (1) as to whether it was made by coercion, Defendant C’s assertion had Defendant C enter Defendant C in the written agreement at detention as an obligor, and thus, the instant agreement was revoked.

(2) In full view of the purport of the entire arguments in the statement in Section B(A) and Section B(6) of this Court’s judgment, E is the representative of the investment company D, and Defendant B is the head of the Suwon Center and operated the Suwon Center by receiving 1% of the amount invested by investors. The Plaintiff recruited D’s investors and received subscription fees in return, Defendant B was a bad credit holder, and traded with the Plaintiff using a bank account in the name of the Defendant C. Since 3-4 persons including the Plaintiff on the day preceding the instant agreement and the day of the instant agreement, they filed a complaint with the Defendants’ House at the latest without giving money to the Defendant B, and the Plaintiff filed a complaint for return of the investment money, and the Plaintiff et al. filed a claim for return of the investment money with the Defendants’ House, and the fact that E and Defendant B were detained on April 19, 2013.

(B) However, in order to be a declaration of intent by coercion, it should be such that the other party has made a fear and expressed his/her intent by unlawfully notifying any harm, and any harm here.