A. As indicated in the attached Form “Tax Claim” with respect to B, the head of the tax office of the same orchard under the Plaintiff’s control as indicated in the “Tax Claim”. From September 8, 2009 to February 1, 2012, the head of the tax office having jurisdiction over the Plaintiff rendered a notice of KRW 17,360,576 of the aggregate of the value-added tax and the global income tax, and the head of the tax office of Busan District under the Plaintiff’s control rendered a notice of each of the KRW 303,576,377 of the capital gains tax on February 3, 2014 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant tax claim”) and as of October 12, 2015, the instant tax claim (including additional dues) became a total of KRW 401,961,210 as indicated in the “Tax Claim

B. B is a state of absence of any other property at the time of the closing of the instant argument.

C. B registered its business with the name of “E” on the 2 and 3th floor of the building indicated in the separate sheet in the name of the Defendant, which is the title holder of the business of the above age club pursuant to the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “instant business compensation”), and operated the age club. As the real estate indicated in the separate sheet is incorporated into the crossing of the light-line railway, it was determined in the name of the Defendant, who is the title holder of the business of the above age club, pursuant to the “Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects”, B did not seek the transfer of the instant business compensation claim to the Defendant

[Reasons for Recognition] 2. The claim for business compensation in this case should be reverted to B, who is the actual operator of the above age club. It can be known that the defendant gains the profit of holding the above business compensation claim without any legal ground, and thereby causes damage equivalent to the amount of the above business compensation claim to B. Thus, as long as B is able to seek the transfer of the above claim that he acquired unfairly against the defendant, the plaintiff, who is the creditor of B, may exercise the above claim on behalf of B in order to preserve his own tax claim in this case.

Therefore, the defendant is a list of the defendant's Osan City.