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

A. On September 26, 2008, Defendant D borrowed KRW 300,000,000 (hereinafter “instant loan”) from Defendant C (the name of the leased was Defendant B) as the interest rate monthly and December 26, 2008.

(2) On September 26, 2008, Defendant D issued to Defendant C a promissory note amounting to KRW 450,000,000 at face value, which is the issuer’s wife, E (D), F andG, and the payee’s Defendant B, as security for the instant loan obligations.

(3) Based on the authentic copy of the notarial deed No. 5432, No. 5432, Nov. 25, 2008, which was drawn up by the notary public in relation to the loan of this case under the name of the obligee, Defendant C was subject to the order of collection of KRW 47,612,00,00,000 (the above I forest is divided into J. J. 37,274, and 10,338,000,000,000,000 won as to the purchase price claim on the land of this case under the name of the obligee, and the amount claimed by the obligor E against the third obligor He (the “the deceased at around 2014”) and the collection order was issued.

(4) On August 3, 2009, Defendant C received a decision of provisional seizure of real estate on the instant land owned by the deceased on August 3, 2009, by using the claim for collection of KRW 450,000,000 against the deceased of Defendant B as the right to be preserved, and around that time, the above provisional seizure registration was completed (hereinafter “the provisional seizure registration”).

B. On July 30, 2009, Defendant D deposited KRW 435,00,000 in the agricultural bank account of Defendant B, the wife of Defendant B, and repaid the instant loan.

However, Defendant C and D agreed to continue to exist without cancelling the registration of entry into a provisional attachment even though the loan claim of this case, which is a preserved bond, was extinguished.

(2) Defendant D is to the Deceased on July 2010.