2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. The Plaintiffs are both married couple, and the Defendants’ mother E operated an insurance agency while operating the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”).

B. On January 19, 2009, E, including deceptive act with respect to the deposit of insurance proceeds of E, had the Plaintiffs informed on January 19, 2009 that “F was selected as an outstanding agency for the same life, and deposited money for five years in the same life life at a fixed interest rate of 8.97%, and that the principal may be refunded after five years.” The Plaintiffs were urged to pay KRW 95.9 million to E on the same day, and KRW 100 million around April 2014. E paid to the Plaintiffs KRW 10.8% interest at fixed interest rate of 10.8% on the same life, and the Plaintiffs paid KRW 150 million to the Plaintiffs for 205 billion on September 14, 2010, and the Plaintiffs paid KRW 200,000 to the Plaintiffs for 200,000 on May 27, 201.”

C. The Defendants’ real estate purchase and sale 1) Defendant D refers to “each of the instant commercial buildings,” collectively referred to in subparagraphs 201 and 202 of the same shopping district, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, 201, and Defendant C.

(2) On April 29, 2015, the Defendants purchased each of the instant commercial buildings, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the grounds of sale.

On the other hand, H assumed each of the collateral security obligations worth KRW 97,50,000,000, established on each of the instant commercial buildings from the Defendants on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 14, 18, 19, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same).