1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 200,000,000 won and the period from January 1, 2014 to December 12, 2017.

Basic Facts

A. The “D Promotion Committee for Establishment of an Urban Environment Improvement Association” (hereinafter “D Promotion Committee”) is an association establishment promotion committee composed of the members of the Daejeon Jung-gu E, Daejeon for the purpose of establishing an association to implement the urban environment improvement project in the area of 62,00 square meters, which was approved by the head of the Gu on April 23, 2008.

Defendant B is a person who was the chairperson of the D Promotion Council, Defendant C is a former auditor, and F is a former adviser.

B. On October 2, 2010, the D Promotion Council decided to select the Plaintiff as a specialized management businessman of the rearrangement project in relation to the said urban environment rearrangement project. On November 2, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff entered into a service contract with the content that the Plaintiff would provide services relating to establishment, etc. (hereinafter “instant service contract”).

C. From August 16, 2010 to July 19, 2013, the Plaintiff leased a total of KRW 200 million to the Defendant in accordance with the instant service agreement, as stipulated in the instant service agreement, on 26 occasions.

(hereinafter the above KRW 200 million is referred to as “instant loan”). D.

On December 17, 2013, the Plaintiff notified that the instant service contract was terminated as of December 31, 2013 on the ground that D’s executives used KRW 50 million of the instant loan differently from the agreement on the grounds for termination of the agreement on the instant service contract, and demanded the return of the instant loan by December 31, 2013.

E. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Daejeon District Court 2014Gahap5320, which claimed the return of the instant loan.

On January 22, 2015, the foregoing court terminated the instant service agreement on December 31, 2013 due to the grounds for termination of the agreement, and the Defendant is obligated to return the instant loan to the Plaintiff in accordance with the terms and conditions of the instant service agreement upon termination. The instant loan claim is a claim for which the period during which the repayment of the loan was due is not fixed, and which is a claim for which the Plaintiff did not have to pay to the Defendant by December 31, 2013.