1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Defendant, who is the Plaintiff’s friendship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, is the Defendant, from November 1, 1999, with the trade name of “E” from the Chungcheongbuk-gun C and D, an electric cable manufacturing business, etc. (hereinafter “instant company”).

(2) On March 13, 2006, the Plaintiff, as the Defendant’s employee, had been in charge of selling the said electric wires, etc. at the Changwon-si’s Changwon-si’s Changwon-si’s Changwon-si’s Changwon-si’s Changwon-si’s Changwon-si’s Changwon-si’s Changwon-si’s office of business, and managing its transaction companies. However, on the condition that the Defendant would pay the Defendant KRW 120 million to the Defendant, the Plaintiff entered into a partnership agreement with the Defendant to jointly operate the instant company.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant trade agreement”). The Plaintiff paid KRW 120 million to the Defendant on the same day.

B. On September 1, 2010, a report on the suspension of business and the closure of business concerning the instant business was submitted in the Dong Jeju District Tax Office, which was the district tax office having jurisdiction over the instant business, for the suspension period from September 1, 201 to February 28, 201, and a report on the suspension of business in the name of the original and Defendant was filed, and was treated as the closure of business on October 11, 201.

C. On January 7, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a payment order seeking payment of KRW 4,342,400 against the Defendant by the Changhae District Court 201Da777, and the Defendant applied for a payment order claiming payment of KRW 4,342,400. Upon filing an application for an objection on January 7, 201, the Defendant was performing as the litigation procedure set forth in Changwon District Court 201DaDa205, Changnam District Court 201. The said court sentenced the dismissal ruling on June 20, 201, which became final and conclusive thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 3-1, Eul evidence 9, Eul evidence 10-1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff 1 won and the defendant decided to make an additional investment of KRW 80 million in relation to the operation of the business of this case, and the plaintiff fulfilled this.