A. 1) The Plaintiff Company E (hereinafter “E”)

(2) On August 27, 2013, Defendant B entered into a sales contract on the land of F Co., Ltd., and Defendant B was the representative director at the time, and Defendant B was the representative director at the time. Defendant B recognized the Plaintiff’s responsibility for failure to register the transfer of ownership pursuant to the said sales contract, and agreed to pay KRW 300 million to the Plaintiff by December 31, 2014, and Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed the said obligation.

3) Therefore, the aforementioned Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30 million and its payment from January 1, 2015 to July 8, 2015, the delivery date of a copy of the instant complaint against Defendant B, the Defendant C, the service date of a copy of the instant complaint against Defendant C, to July 1, 2015, the amount of 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act, the amount of 20% per annum prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion of Legal Proceedings from the following day to September 30, 2015, and the amount of delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment. (b) The judgment by service (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

C. According to the amendment of the provisions on statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings on Partial Dismissals, 15% per annum is applied from October 1, 2015, the enforcement date of the amended Presidential Decree. Therefore, the part claiming damages for delay exceeding this is dismissed.

Around February 15, 2007, the Plaintiff entered into a contract on the sale of land E, C, and H land in KRW 277,780,00,00. At the time, Defendant D neglected the value of the said land and agreed to obtain permission for conversion of mountainous district and permission for road construction for the said land, but it was impossible to grant permission for conversion of mountainous district and permission for road construction for the said land.

After all, Defendant D used the fact that the Plaintiff had been well aware of by concluding a real estate sales contract with Defendant B.