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

purport, purport, and.

A. On October 10, 2007, the Plaintiff introduced D from Defendant C, which was known to it, and requested D to grant a discount of promissory notes with a face value of KRW 30 million issued by the U.S. Comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. on October 10, 2007 (payment date: January 4, 2008; hereinafter “first Promissory Notes”) and one promissory note with a face value of KRW 50 million issued by the said Co., Ltd. on the same day (the payment date; January 4, 2008; hereinafter “second Promissory Notes”).

B. On October 10, 2007, D received each of the Promissory Notes from the Plaintiff and paid to the Plaintiff KRW 68 million remaining after deducting KRW 12 million from the total face value of each of the Promissory Notes in this case from KRW 80,000,000, under the name of prior interest, etc., and issued a receipt for the said KRW 12 million to the Plaintiff.

C. Defendant B was in possession of the First Promissory Notes from D, and was paid KRW 30 million to the deposit account in the name of E, his spouse, on January 7, 2018, by presenting support for the Gwangju banking business around January 2018.

Defendant C was in possession of the Second Promissory Notes from D, and was paid KRW 50 million by presenting it to the Bank, Nam-ro branch.

E. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for return of unjust enrichment against D with respect to each of the Promissory Notes in Suwon District Court Decision 2017 Ghana12549 (hereinafter “instant Promissory Notes”) with the purport that D would return KRW 7,240,000 equivalent to the interest amount exceeding the Interest Limitation Act out of KRW 12 million as a prior interest, and that “D would pay the Plaintiff KRW 4,057,973 and its delay damages,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive at that time due to the Plaintiff’s failure to appeal.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, significant facts, Gap's 1 to 3, 6, 8, 10 to 13 numbers are each numbers.