1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant Postal Tech Co., Ltd., lusethyl, Co., Ltd., Estetrac,

1. Claim against Defendant 1, 3, 4, 7, and 8: Judgment based on the recommendation of confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Claims against Defendant 5 and 6: Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act).

3. The Plaintiff, who runs the wholesale and retail business of steel products claimed against Defendant 2 on May 30, 2014, supplied the Defendant Dong Dong Reinforcement Co., Ltd. with steel products and received promissory notes (hereinafter “instant promissory notes”) on June 10, 2014 due date, September 20, 2014. The fact that the instant promissory notes were endorsed as endorsers on June 12, 2014, and the fact that the payment of the instant bills was refused on the due date is without dispute between the parties or based on the written evidence Nos. 2-1 and 3, and thus, it is deemed that the Defendant Seo Donice Co., Ltd., Ltd., was an endorser with the duty to pay the instant bills at the rate of KRW 25 million, 200,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000 won, 250,000,000.

Defendant Pacific Co., Ltd.: (a) endorsed and delivers the Promissory Notes to the Defendant Company; (b) however, the Defendants Company was unable to be supplied with the goods from the Defendant Company; (c) however, the endorser of the Promissory Notes cannot set up against the holder defenses based on his personal relations with the drawer or with the previous holder; (d) however, in a case where the holder knowingly acquired the Promissory Notes to the detriment of the obligor (Article 17 of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act); (c) although the holder was aware that it would prejudice the obligor, goods were not supplied as alleged by the Defendant