2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

2. On April 26, 2010, the fact that the Plaintiff prepared the instant agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant that the Defendant recognized the remainder of the construction price of KRW 162 million against the Plaintiff as a lien is recognized as a lien is acknowledged. According to the evidence Nos. 2-1, it is recognized that the Plaintiff prepared a notarial deed stating that the Plaintiff would approve the claim of KRW 162 million between the Defendant and the Defendant on April 27, 2010 and repay it by May 3, 2010.

① However, in the instant agreement, “if there exists any indemnity payment due to the exercise of the same lien or the acquisition of the above 501 by the Defendant, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30 million as a royalty.” If the Defendant’s claim remains, even if the above conditions have been fulfilled as the Defendant’s assertion, it is highly probable that the Defendant would settle the above contract payment claim in the way of deducting the above 30 million contract payment claim from the above contract payment claim (hereinafter “instant contract payment claim”) from the economic perspective, in favor of the Defendant, and there is a high probability that the Defendant would process the above method in favor of the Defendant, it would be somewhat unusual that the Defendant stated that the Defendant would make the above contract payment without mentioning the Defendant’s claim for the above contract payment, i.e., payment without title., payment without title, to the Plaintiff.”