1. The defendant shall pay 18,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from May 28, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, around January 28, 2012, served as the representative director of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) for the purpose of developing process technology for converting circular resources into resources (hereinafter “C”), and resigned on January 28, 2013.

C Around the first half of 2012, he acquired the facility of the facilities of the facilities of the facilities of the two weeks, and promoted the business with the permission for the operation of the facilities of the facilities of the two owners (approval).

B. The Plaintiff was introduced by the Defendant that the Plaintiff had experience in operating the construction company in Yangju City around the summer of 2012.

Around that time, the Plaintiff asked the Defendant to the effect that “the permission (approval) for the operation of the relevant facilities is obtained from the viewing.”

C. On August 20, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 3 million to the Defendant’s name account; KRW 5 million on August 28, 2012; KRW 7 million on September 19, 2012; KRW 18 million on October 9, 2012; and KRW 3 million ( KRW 5 million on KRW 5 million); and

(hereinafter “instant payment”) D.

C did not obtain permission (approval) for the operation of the relevant facilities from both prime viewers until February 2013, and eventually C renounced the operation of the relevant facilities.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 16 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), witness E and D's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The payment of the Plaintiff was made on the condition that the Defendant obtained permission (approval) for the operation of the flexible facility from both viewing and viewing.

In other words, the Defendant agreed to the effect that, at the time of receiving the instant payment, the Plaintiff and the Defendant would return the money received if they were not to obtain the permission (approval) for the operation of the facilities from both viewing.

However, since the defendant did not obtain permission (approval) for the operation of the relevant flexible equipment, it is necessary to refund the payment of this case and its delay damages.

B. The payment of the instant case to the Defendant is from the viewing of the Plaintiff to the Defendant.