2. The part of the conjunctive claim in the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

3...

A. On July 30, 2015, the Plaintiff and C drafted a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement of No. 388,000,000 (hereinafter “No. 90,000,”) on July 30, 2015, on the Plaintiff’s claim against C and related litigation (i.e., the instant notarial deed”).

The instant notarial deed was drafted for the repayment of KRW 90,00,000 for the acquisition price to be paid by C to the Plaintiff on July 30, 2015, where three parties, including the Plaintiff and E (C’s wife), to purchase the Plaintiff’s share in the Chinese house (F) where C had engaged in the same business.

Luxembourg filed a lawsuit against C in favor of the said court on October 13, 2016, by filing a loan claim with the Chuncheon District Court Decision 2016Gau174, the said court rendered a favorable judgment that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 20,000,000 and damages for delay.”

Article 22(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “The Plaintiff shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 10,766,740 and any delay damages therefrom jointly and severally,” and Article 22(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “The Plaintiff shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 10,76,740 and any delay damages therefrom shall be paid to the Plaintiff.”

Applicant C filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the Plaintiff on January 11, 2017 with the Gwangju District Court 2016Kadan197444, which sought the denial of compulsory execution based on the instant notarial deed, and the judgment dismissing C’s claim was rendered.

(C) The allegation that the agreement for share sale would be revoked by deception or by default is not accepted in entirety). Accordingly, C appealed appealed with the Gwangju District Court 2017Na51531, but was dismissed on August 25, 2017.

The above judgment was finalized on September 12, 2017.

B. (i) C is not more than the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 owned by C and the Defendant as of February 20, 2017.