2. Defendant B: (a) KRW 149,353,232 to the Plaintiff; and (b) March 21, 2020 to the Plaintiff.

A. D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) is a corporation incorporated on September 4, 2013 for the purpose of manufacturing semiconductor equipment.

Matters concerning executive officers of the corporate register of non-party C are registered as the only executive officer (in-house director) from November 10, 2014.

Defendant B is the father of Defendant C.

B. On October 4, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the non-party company seeking delivery of the E-ground factories, machinery, apparatus, etc. (hereinafter “instant factories, etc.”) and return of unjust enrichment (hereinafter “previous lawsuit”). On July 13, 2017, the said court sentenced the non-party company to deliver the instant factories, etc. to the Plaintiff and to pay the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 8,09,900 per month from December 30, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the instant factories, etc.

On July 29, 2017, the above judgment became final and conclusive on July 29, 2017, because the non-party company appealed against the above judgment, but later the appeal was deemed to

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant judgment”) C.

Then, on August 3, 2017, the non-party company delivered the instant factory, etc. to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 9, 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Grounds for the Plaintiff’s claim

A. The primary claim is that the non-party company has the form of a legal entity in the external form, but it merely takes the form of a legal entity, and it is nothing more than the defendant B's individual company behind the legal entity.

In addition, even if Defendant B actually discontinued the non-party company for the purpose of evading the obligation to return unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff of the non-party company, it continues to conduct the business of the non-party company by establishing the non-party company’s personal enterprise called “F” with its corporate personality maintained.

Therefore, even if the act of the non-party company is the act of the non-party company, the non-party company and defendant B.