A. As to the fraud case No. 7392 of Daejeon District Prosecutors’ Office (2012 type No. 7392), Plaintiff A and Line sperm were suspended from indictment on December 17, 2012, and the reasons are as follows.

The suspected crime of fraud is recognized by receiving a total sum of 38,728,420 won from 10 times to 38,728,420 won through extending the period of hospitalization, etc. even though hospitalization is not required substantially from August 14, 2006 to February 1, 201.

There is no criminal record of the same kind.

The degree of participation of the respondent is minor because the wife E led and managed the above insurance.

There are reasons to prosecute the suspect E who is an accomplice on the same day and take into account the circumstances.

The prosecution shall be suspended.

2. The suspected crime of fraud is recognized by being granted an amount equivalent to KRW 19,462,539, on seven occasions by means of extending the duration of hospitalization, etc., even though hospitalization is not necessary substantially from February 13, 2007 to March 24, 201, even though the hospitalized treatment is unnecessary.

There is no criminal record of the same kind.

The degree of participation of the person under consideration is minor as the parent of the person under consideration has subscribed to and managed the insurance.

There is a reason to prosecute the non-detention of the suspect E who is an accomplice on the same day and take into account the circumstances.

The prosecution shall be suspended.

3. It is recognized that the Defendant received an amount equivalent to KRW 21,526,880 of the total insurance money five times by extending the period of hospitalization, etc., even if hospitalization needs to be substantially conducted from April 7, 2009 to April 7, 201, and received the amount equivalent to KRW 21,526,880 from five times.

There is no criminal record of the same kind.

The degree of participation of the person under consideration is minor as the parent of the person under consideration has subscribed to and managed the insurance.

There is a reason to prosecute the non-detention of the suspect E who is an accomplice on the same day and take into account the circumstances.

The prosecution shall be suspended.

B. The existence of a final and conclusive judgment between the Plaintiff A and the Defendant, and the Defendant’s repayment 1) The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff A seeking the return of unjust enrichment with the Seoul Central District Court 2014 Ghana 5162790.