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

A. On May 28, 2008, the Plaintiff was indicted for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) upon complaint by the Defendant, and the Defendant appeared and testified as a witness on the fourth trial day of the Seoul High Court case No. 2008No479 (hereinafter “instant criminal case”) against the Plaintiff.

B. On July 23, 2008, in the instant criminal case against the Plaintiff, each of the facts charged against the Plaintiff was the forgery of the private document and the uttering of the private investigation document; the forgery of the private document and the uttering of the private investigation document on the payment commitment; the fraudulent means on the basis of the payment commitment; C and D; the forgery of the private document on the receipt; the uttering of the private document on the sales contract; the forgery of the private document and the uttering of the private investigation document; the use of the private document on the sales contract; the fraud against the Defendant; the fraud of the private document on the sales contract; the amount of KRW 85 million against the Defendant; the fraud of the private document on the Libergas hotel against the Defendant; the intention of the Defendant on August 29, 2003; the fact on March 23, 2006 to the Defendant; the fact on the forgery of the private document on the building and the use of the private document on the qualification forgery; the fact on the attempted use of the private document and the use of the falsified document.

C. On December 24, 2008, a judgment was rendered to dismiss all appeals filed by both the Plaintiff and the Prosecutor regarding the instant criminal case.

(Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7302). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 5 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion that he was detained due to the defendant's incompetence was suffering from severe mental pain due to the defendant's maternal senscence, so the defendant shall pay 30,000,000 won to the plaintiff as consolation money.

The plaintiff is an attorney at law to clarify that the defendant is not guilty on the wind that the defendant proves the facts charged by the prosecutor through the Maternity card.