1. The Defendant’s written instrument drawn up on January 10, 2013 against the Plaintiff is based on the Promissory Notes No. 53, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the party is the head of the branch office of the Frist Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant branch office”). The Plaintiff received subsidies from the Defendant and then registered as an insurance solicitor from November 1, 2012, but the Plaintiff was regularly registered as an insurance solicitor belonging to the instant branch office on December 11, 2012 and December 14, 2012.

A person who served as an insurance solicitor belonging to the branch of this case.

B. From November 1, 2012 to October 31, 2015, the Plaintiff paid subsidies and returned agreements 1) KRW 45 million as subsidies from the Defendant for conducting business, such as soliciting insurance, as an insurance solicitor belonging to the instant branch from November 1, 2012 to October 31, 2015 (hereinafter “instant subsidies”).

(B) The payment of KRW 30 million was received, and the remaining KRW 15 million was paid in one lump sum after being registered as an insurance solicitor belonging to the instant branch, and the remaining KRW 15 million was paid in 1,500,000 per month during the 10 month period from the date of registration to the 10th month (hereinafter “instant payment agreement”).

(2) At the time of the Plaintiff’s withdrawal from office for not more than three years, or the Plaintiff’s achievement (aggravating month) was less than the subsidy, 100% of the instant subsidy was to be recovered.

(C) On January 10, 2013, in order to secure the performance of the Plaintiff’s obligation to return the instant subsidy to the Defendant, the Defendant paid all the instant subsidy to the Plaintiff. On January 10, 2013, the Plaintiff, a promissory note No. 100,000 won (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) with the issuer, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, the Defendant, and the Defendant, the date of payment, and the face value of KRW 45 million (hereinafter “instant promissory note”).

After the issuance of the Promissory Notes, in the event that the payment of the Promissory Notes in this case is delayed with No. 53, 2013 with respect to the Promissory Notes in this case as of the same day, a notarial deed recognizing that there is no objection even if they are subject to compulsory execution (hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed”).