A. On August 23, 2012, the Defendant prepared and sent to the Plaintiff a letter of performance with the following content (hereinafter “instant letter of performance”).

The Defendant promises to pay KRW 37,000,000 to the Plaintiff KRW 10,000,000 until September 30, 2012, and to pay KRW 20,000,000 to the remainder by November 30, 2012.

In addition, C promises to set up a collateral mortgage on the land and the ground property owned by C's ASEAN until the full repayment date of the debt amount.

B. In accordance with the instant performance memorandum, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage over KRW 37 million with respect to the E large-sum E, 149 square meters and its ground-based detached houses in smuggling-si on September 7, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 37,000,000 won in accordance with the written statement of performance of this case and 5% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act from December 1, 2012 to July 8, 2014, which is the day following the due date of repayment of the complaint of this case, and 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant asserts that the above KRW 37,00,000 is related to the acquisition price of shares of F Co., Ltd. and the fees for the use of the above company, and the defendant merely is merely a representative director, and the defendant is not liable for this issue. The execution rejection of this case was made by the plaintiff's coercion, and thus,

However, even if the defendant is a representative director in the form of the defendant, it is difficult for the defendant to be exempted from liability as long as the letter of performance of this case was prepared by him, and it is insufficient to recognize that the letter of performance of this case was prepared by the plaintiff's coercion only with the statement of No. 8.

4. Conclusion.