(However, the "creditor" is the plaintiff, and the "debtor" is the defendant). 2. Service by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

3. Part 3 of the dismissal

A. The part of the claim amounting to KRW 70,00,000 for the loan and delayed payment thereof claimed by the Plaintiff. However, in case where there are several obligees or obligors, each obligee or obligor has a right at an equal ratio and bears obligations unless there is any special intention (Article 408 of the Civil Act), and in case of loans claim amounting to KRW 70,000,000, the obligee is two and the Plaintiff and C are two and there is no special declaration among the Plaintiff and the Defendant on September 21, 2009. Thus, it is reasonable to view the above claims of the Plaintiff and C as divided bonds.

The Plaintiff asserted that C acquired the part corresponding to C’s share out of the above loan claim, but the assignment of nominative claim cannot be set up against the obligor or other third party unless the transferor notifies the obligor or the obligor does not consent (Article 450(1) of the Civil Act), and C, the transferor, notified the Defendant of the assignment of claim.

There is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant consented to the assignment of claims.

Therefore, the amount that the Defendant is liable to pay to the Plaintiff is KRW 35,000,000 ( KRW 70,000,000 x 1/2). Therefore, there is no reason for seeking payment exceeding the above recognition scope.

B. The Plaintiff claimed KRW 40,000,000 and damages for delay on loan amounting to KRW 40,000. However, in case where there are several obligees or obligors, each obligee or obligor has a right at an equal ratio and bears obligations unless they have made a special declaration (Article 408 of the Civil Act), and in case of loans worth KRW 40,000,000, the obligee is two persons with the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and there is no special declaration on the loan certificate drawn up on October 26, 2009 between the Plaintiff, D and the Defendant.