A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant came to know from 1995 to a long time.

B. On May 19, 2008, the Defendant issued a promissory note with the payee as the Plaintiff on October 20, 2008, with the face value of KRW 380,000,000 in each Seoul as the face value of each Seoul (hereinafter “ Promissory Notes 1”) and a promissory note 150,000,000 in face value (hereinafter “second Promissory Notes 1, and each Promissory Notes hereinafter “each Promissory Notes 2”). On the same day, with respect to each Promissory Notes 1, each Promissory Notes hereinafter “each Promissory Notes 2”), and with respect to each of the aforesaid Promissory Notes 1, with the intention of recognizing and recognizing that there is no objection even if the payment of the Promissory Notes is delayed, the Defendant written a notarized deed with the intent of recognizing and recognizing that there is no objection (No. 269, 270 in the Chap Office 208).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant, as the issuer of each of the Promissory Notes in this case, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, who is the holder, the total sum of KRW 530,000,000, and delay damages therefor.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. A) The Plaintiff asserts that the promissory note No. 1 was issued in order to secure the Plaintiff’s loan claims arising from the Plaintiff’s lending of KRW 350 million to the Plaintiff on March 25, 2008. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 20140, Mar. 25, 2008; Presidential Decree No. 20358, Feb. 25, 2008; Presidential Decree No. 20307, Feb. 25, 2008.

B) However, with respect to the part of the Promissory Notes 1, which is KRW 350 million, the Defendant did not agree to pay for the obligations of the Promissory Notes D, and there is no underlying claim (in particular, the amount of KRW 50 million is KRW 50 million in the instant case as to the underlying claim.