1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 15,571,840 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and against this, from December 21, 2013 to February 17, 2017.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around March 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant: Provided, however, the Defendant is the owner of a building under the name of the Defendant, and the actual owner appears to be C. A new house construction contract was concluded, which is the owner of a building; the contract amount is set at KRW 100,00,000 and the value-added tax is to be paid separately; the construction period was agreed from March 15, 2013 to June 30, 2013.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction contract,” and the said construction work is referred to as the “instant construction work”). B.

The Defendant entered into the instant construction contract with the Plaintiff and the Defendant, in order to report the cost expenditure amount to a higher level in the process of tax return and obtain tax benefits, called the “business (UP) contract” in which the contract amount was actually entered higher than the actual amount in the process of tax return. The Plaintiff and the Defendant requested to separately prepare the contract amounting to KRW 100,000,000 of the contract amount and the contract amount stating the contract amount of KRW 150,000 of the contract amount as well.

C. The construction process was delayed due to the Plaintiff’s change in the roof location of a newly built house during which the instant construction was underway.

On July 3, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed that the construction period of the instant construction shall be extended by July 31, 2013, and compensation for delay due to the said extension shall not be calculated, and the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 16,00,000 with additional expenses due to the change in the roof location of the house.

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

Of the construction cost under the instant construction contract, the Defendant agreed to offset the amount of KRW 80,000,000 among the construction cost under the instant contract and KRW 16,00,000,000 for additional costs under the instant agreement: Provided, That the amount actually paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff is KRW 15,150,000 upon the agreement to offset the amount of KRW 850,000 for the industrial accident insurance premium to be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. Each payment was made.

F. The Plaintiff continues to carry out the instant construction work after the instant agreement.