1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence of 1 to 5, Eul evidence of 1 to 12, or a dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the whole pleadings:

The Plaintiff requested D to make a request for issuance of a letter of guarantee to the Defendant, which is between D and Gopo-gu of the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund, at the time of filing an application for the issuance of a letter of guarantee with the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund in order to obtain operating funds. The same year from April 16, 2014 to the same year.

5. By the end of 16.16, the Defendant paid the sum of KRW 28,542,380 to the Defendant.

B. The Defendant requested D to issue a prompt guarantee certificate to the Plaintiff, and as a result, the Plaintiff issued a guarantee certificate of KRW 800 million from the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund around April 14, 2014, and obtained a loan of KRW 1 billion from an industrial bank by using the guarantee certificate around April 16, 2014.

C. On April 17, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment with prison labor and 28,542,380 won for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes in Busan District Court on April 17, 2015, and the above judgment became final and conclusive.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant received KRW 28,542,380 from the Plaintiff as a honorarium for D and acquired it by using it as one’s own cost of living, and that the Defendant sought damages equivalent to the same amount against the Defendant. The Defendant asserts that the said money was received as a consideration for arranging the issuance of a letter of guarantee, and that there was no deception for the Plaintiff, and that it constitutes illegal consideration.

B. First of all, as to whether the Defendant deceivings the Plaintiff by deceiving the Plaintiff to use it as a honorarium for D in relation to the issuance of a letter of guarantee even though the Defendant was an intention to use it as a cost of living, the health room and the health room Gap 1.