Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of the claim.

A. On November 29, 2012, the Plaintiff-type C purchased 20,000 won of the shares of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) for which the Defendant was the representative director from the Defendant.

B. From February 4, 2014 to March 26, 2014, the Plaintiff remitted a total of KRW 900 million to D’s account as D’s investment proceeds.

C. On September 12, 2014, the Plaintiff and C drafted a written agreement with the Defendant regarding the recovery of KRW 1.1 billion (hereinafter “instant agreement”). On the same day, the Defendant paid KRW 110 million to the Plaintiff and C pursuant to paragraph (3) of the instant agreement.

The shareholders A(Plaintiffs) and C of the Agreement for the Settlement of Bankruptcy Co., Ltd. shall enter into an agreement on the recovery of investment amounts of 1.1 billion (A.90 million and C.200 million) invested through capital increase with capital increase as follows:

-B shall make every effort to recover future-investment funds, and the method and time for collection shall be discussed and determined by future discussions.

Both parties shall not raise any civil or criminal objection with respect to the above cases, and if they raise a civil or criminal objection, they may bring an objection with respect to the amount already paid according to the agreement, after repayment thereof.

The agreement in paragraphs 1 and 2 above is established by depositing KRW 110 million into the account designated by the shareholder.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, and 4 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap witness C's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The party's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion against the Defendant is seeking payment of KRW 790 million unpaid (= KRW 900 million - KRW 1100 million) and damages for delay after deducting KRW 1100 million paid pursuant to paragraph (3) of the instant agreement from the amount invested in KRW 90 million under the pretext of the return of the investment amount in accordance with the instant agreement.

In this regard, the defendant only prepared the agreement of this case at the level of responsibility for the return of the investment amount.