1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff No. 320 of the 2013 deed prepared by C on November 14, 2013 by a law firm C.

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is the plaintiff's agent.

B. The Defendant lent KRW 368,590,000 to the Plaintiff over several years, and agreed to receive KRW 370,000,000 from the Plaintiff, including the above loan and the interest claim thereon.

(hereinafter “instant claim”). C.

On November 4, 2013, the Plaintiff issued and delivered to the Defendant a promissory note of KRW 500 million in face value with the Defendant as the addressee (hereinafter “instant promissory note”). On November 14, 2013, the Plaintiff drafted a notarized promissory note of KRW 100 million in face value with the Defendant as the addressee (hereinafter “instant promissory note”). On November 14, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) recognized the issuance of the instant promissory note with respect to the Defendant; and (b) drafted a notarized promissory note of KRW 500 million in face value with respect to the instant promissory

On November 22, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for rehabilitation with the Suwon District Court 2013dan127, and received a decision on commencing rehabilitation procedures from the said court on January 24, 2014.

In the above rehabilitation case, the defendant reported the claim of this case as a rehabilitation claim, and the plaintiff denied the claim of this case.

Accordingly, the Defendant filed a final claim inspection judgment with Suwon District Court 2014da666, and submitted a preparatory aspect to the effect that the instant promissory note Notarial Deed was prepared in order to secure the instant claim during the said lawsuit.

In the final claim inspection judgment above, the plaintiff and the defendant confirmed that "the plaintiff's rehabilitation claim against the defendant is KRW 370,000,000,000" was a judicial compromise.

However, the Defendant did not report rehabilitation claims or rehabilitation security rights with respect to the instant promissory note gold claims, and thus, did not include the claims subject to repayment according to the rehabilitation plan.

E. On September 17, 2014, the rehabilitation plan, including the instant claim, was approved, which was finalized as KRW 59,200,000 on September 17, 2014.

After November 30, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 11,840,00 to the Defendant.