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

On September 7, 2009, C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction”) operated by the Plaintiff entered into a contract with D Co., Ltd., operated by the Defendant, to contract for the construction of solar power generation facilities worth KRW 5.28 billion (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction”).

On December 23, 2009, the Defendant prepared a cash storage certificate (hereinafter “the cash storage certificate of this case”) dated 23, 2009 stating “I will keep cash KRW 00,000,000,000 in cash,” in the name of “D representative director B,” and deliver it to the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff transferred KRW 150 million on the same day to D’s corporate bank account.

On February 23, 2010, the defendant applied for D's corporate rehabilitation to the Seoul Central District Court.

(3) On March 23, 2010, the Plaintiff acquired the Defendant with KRW 150 million, which is the primary cause of the claim, as a result of the fact that there was no dispute between the Plaintiff and the Seoul Central District Court’s decision on March 23, 2010.

In other words, the defendant was already dissolved, or when D was economically distressed, received the construction cost from LGNS and made a false statement to the plaintiff as if D had the ability to repay the construction cost of KRW 150 million. On December 23, 2009, the plaintiff extended KRW 150 million to the defendant on December 23, 2009, but did not return it.

The defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the damages of KRW 150 million and the damages for delay.

In accordance with the cash custody certificate of this case, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 150 million with the borrowed amount of KRW 150 million.

Even if the person who prepared the cash custody certificate of this case is a corporation D, the legal personality of this case has been punished, or the defendant has to use the money individually.