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

A. On October 7, 2013, the power of attorney (hereinafter referred to as “the power of attorney of this case”) signed on October 7, 2013, to delegate to the Defendant the authority to commission the Defendant to prepare a notarial deed pertaining to the following matters:

Creditors: The debtor: The date of borrowing on October 4, 2013: 30 million won: November 30, 2013.

On October 7, 2013, the Defendant entrusted the preparation of a notarial deed to a notary public’s office as the agent of the principal and the Plaintiff, and on the same day, a notarial deed was prepared to the effect that “the Plaintiff, E, and F (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) borrowed KRW 30 million from the Defendant on October 4, 2013 and bears the obligation, and that the Plaintiff, E, and F (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) bears the obligation, and the interest and delay damages on the said obligation shall be 29.9% per annum; the said obligation shall be repaid by November 30, 2013; and if the Plaintiff, etc. fail to perform the said obligation, no objection shall be raised even if compulsory execution is conducted immediately against the Plaintiff, etc.”

(hereinafter referred to as “instant authentic deed”). C.

Based on the instant notarial deed, the Defendant applied for a compulsory auction against six motor vehicles owned by the Plaintiff to Suwon District Court Ansan Branch G, and the said court rendered a decision to commence compulsory auction on December 13, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, and 6 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. On October 4, 2013, where the Plaintiff’s representative director was the Plaintiff’s assertion of the parties, E and the Defendant agreed to receive KRW 60 million out of the Defendant’s claim 14 million against the Plaintiff and not to claim the remainder in the future. As such, the Plaintiff did not borrow money from the Defendant or bear the Defendant’s obligation as stated in the letter of delegation of this case or the content of the Notarial Deed, the Plaintiff did not have any reason to prepare the power of delegation of this case.