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

The Plaintiff acquired the Plaintiff’s land ownership by compulsory auction on August 30, 201, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of 1,160 square meters in the area of 1,160 square meters prior to K in Si, Si, Si, and on September 6, 2011, acquired the Plaintiff’s land ownership of 2,552 square meters prior to L at Si, Si, Si,

(B) On August 10, 2012, the land of the said two parcels was changed by the parcel number, size, etc. as shown in the separate sheet No. 1 following division, annexation, etc. (hereinafter “instant land”). regardless of whether before or after division and consolidation, the land of the said two parcels was the land of the Plaintiff Company. The Plaintiff Company prepared the written contract for acquisition of the Plaintiff Company’s shares was one company in which M, China, owns 100% of its shares. M delegated N on August 10, 2012, the authority to prepare documents on appointment and dismissal of executive officers, preparation of documents on corporate real estate disposition, etc.

N on August 10, 2012, the director and auditor of the Plaintiff Company, and the Chinese father, N, China, the father of N, respectively, was appointed as the representative director of the Plaintiff Company.

around November 2012, N negotiated terms and conditions on the sale and purchase of the instant land with Defendant G seeking to purchase the instant land. On November 19, 2012, N drafted a share acquisition agreement in the name of M andO stating that “M transfers 20,000 shares of the Plaintiff Company to O for KRW 100 million” on November 19, 2012.

However, N did not have obtained consent from M to the making of the above contract.

Based on this, on November 19, 2012, the board, the representative director of the Plaintiff, prepared the minutes of a temporary general meeting of shareholders stating that “one shareholder present and consented to the agenda on sale of the instant land.”

Since then, N was indicted on the charge of forging the above stock acquisition agreement in M’s name, and was convicted of forging private documents and uttering of an investigation document.

In addition to the crime of forging private documents and the crime of uttering of falsified Documents, the above court of the Incheon District Court (2016No. 2222) is also suspected of embezzlement due to the disposal of the land in this case.