A. On July 7, 2016, the Defendants concluded a merger agreement with the following purport: (a) the Defendants divided the part of the electrical construction business of Defendant Ssung Electric Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Ssung Electric Co., Ltd.”) and merged the said part into the Defendant Cho Sung Electric Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Ssung Electric Co., Ltd”); (b) the existing obligation related to the portion of the business to be divided and merged is borne by Defendant Ssung Electric Co., Ltd.; and (c) Defendant Ssung Electric Co., Ltd is liable only for the remaining

B. On July 21, 2016, the Defendants held a special general meeting of shareholders on July 21, 2016, and approved the above merger agreement with the consent of all shareholders present at the meeting of three shareholders, and one of the shareholders present at the defendant present at the above merger agreement with the consent of all shareholders present at the meeting. On August 23, 2016, the Defendants reported the progress of the merger by split at each temporary general meeting of shareholders, and completed the registration of each company merger by split.

(hereinafter “this case’s merger after division”)

At the time of the instant merger by split and merger, Defendant Ssung Electric Co., Ltd did not give separate peremptory notice as to whether there was an objection to the instant merger by split and merger to the Daegu Bank and the National Bank.

The plaintiff is the defendant Won-Won-W.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to Articles 530-11(2) and 527-5(1) of the Commercial Act, determination on the cause of claim, “A company shall give public notice to creditors who have any objection to the merger through division within two weeks from the date when the general meeting of shareholders passes a resolution to approve the agreement of the merger through division, and shall give peremptory notice to creditors known to the company, respectively.”

Considering that the corporate division and merger brings about a significant change in the company's property, which is a collateral for the claim, it violates the creditor protection procedure.