A. The Plaintiff’s claim indication ① Claim for the remainder of KRW 1,740,000 under the “Agreement on Construction Works in the Bank of Korea” entered into with the said Defendants on March 31, 2012. ② Claim for KRW 57,550,000 for the bonds that the Plaintiff acquired from the original special lighting company on August 30, 2012 (the details of the acquired bonds: the original special lighting company: the price for the production installation works of the GED system contracted by the said Defendants around March 23, 2012)

(b) Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Claim against Defendant C

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s primary claim (Liability as a transferee of mutual continuity) (1) The Plaintiff’s claim had a business claim against the Defendant A, who had operated the instant database (hereinafter “E”) as indicated in paragraph (1) of this Article.

However, Defendant C entered into the instant business transfer agreement with Defendant A on February 4, 2013, and continued use of the trade name (E) or roof and business marks, and thus, Defendant C also is jointly and severally liable to pay the money set forth in paragraph (1) of the Disposition.

(2) The key issue of this part of the claim is whether the trade name, etc. of Defendant C belongs to.

However, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances, it is difficult to view that Defendant C had sufficiently proved that the trade name, etc. of the instant waivers continued to have been used.

① According to the instant contract for the transfer of business, the existing trade name is excluded from the transfer, and the Defendant A shall file a report on the discontinuance of business, and the Defendant C shall file a new business registration.

(Articles 2(9) and 4(2). Accordingly, Defendant C completed the business registration with the trade name “F” on February 21, 2013, two weeks after the date of the instant business transfer contract, and again changed the business registration to F on June 1, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] The evidence Nos. 2, 11, 6, and 9 are written. ② On the other hand, the name that belongs to the transferee is not itself a trade name.