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

The Plaintiff is a trustee in bankruptcy of A who was appointed by the Seoul Central District Court Decision No. 2013Hahap139 on September 26, 2013 by the Plaintiff Company A (hereinafter referred to as “A”).

C is a person who served as a representative director of A from November 26, 1999 to April 6, 2007, and the defendant is a person who has a private interest with C.

A on November 5, 2010, Seoul Central District Court 2010Kahap113439, “C, in violation of the Mutual Savings Banks Act, extended loans exceeding the limit on loans to the same person to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant loans”) and did not secure sufficient security, and filed a lawsuit seeking compensation for damages against C on the ground that it incurred approximately KRW 14.1 billion to the Plaintiff.

On December 6, 2011, the above court rendered a ruling to the effect that “C shall pay A KRW 1.7 billion and delay damages therefor,” and C appealed appealed as Seoul High Court Decision 2012Na12728, but was sentenced to the same purport on June 14, 2013.

(4) However, the first instance judgment was changed to the same purport without dismissing an appeal on the grounds that the scope of res judicata has changed due to the dismissal of the counterclaim due to the denial of the existence of the automatic claim, even though C made a counterclaim in the appellate trial. C again appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2013Da57498, but the appeal was dismissed on November 14, 2013, and the judgment of the said appellate court became final and conclusive.

On the other hand, on September 22, 2008, C completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant on August 4, 2008.

After that, on March 6, 2014, the Defendant sold the instant real estate in KRW 188 million to E, and completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the said sale on the same day.

[Reasons for Recognition] The plaintiff's assertion that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1, 2, and 14 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleading.