1. It was concluded on November 17, 2012 with respect to the claims indicated in the separate sheet between the Defendant and the Symar Business Co., Ltd.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the price of goods with the Seoul Eastern District Court 201Ga1837, Nov. 1, 2011 to Nov. 7, 2012, on the ground that “The Plaintiff supplied 298,545,352 won (hereinafter “the Plaintiff”) with the sate lease, etc. and received the payment of the price until Nov. 30, 2012, but the annual incidental business was not paid after the date of payment.” The Plaintiff’s judgment became final and conclusive around August 29, 2013 as Seoul East Eastern District Court 2013Ga1837 on the ground that the said lawsuit was initiated by service by public notice, and that “The Plaintiff shall be paid the price of goods to the Plaintiff at 298,545,352 won and the rate of full payment from July 12, 2013 to the date of full payment.”

B. On the other hand, on September 2012, the Japanese Fire Fighting System awarded a subcontract for the part of the Fire Fighting System (hereinafter “instant construction”) in the attached Form No. 25,300,000 won to the Defendant, which the Japanese Fire Fighting System was awarded by the Japanese Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul”) (hereinafter “instant construction”). However, the payment was not made.

Accordingly, on November 17, 2012, the Defendant entered into an agreement on direct payment of subcontract price (hereinafter “instant direct payment agreement”) with the content that “the Defendant agrees to directly receive the payment of KRW 25,300,000 from the third enterprise of the instant construction price” (hereinafter “instant direct payment agreement”).

C. On February 13, 2013, the three-one company deposited KRW 31,491,90 of the construction cost of the instant case related to the provisional attachment against the instant claim on the ground that “the claim for the construction cost of the instant case was served separately by the Defendant and seven other parties, such as the provisional attachment of the claim, the seizure and collection order, the notification of the seizure of the claim, and the written consent to the attachment of the instant claim,” in the Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2013Hun-Ba648, Feb. 13, 2013. The Defendant received KRW 25,300,000 of the said deposit

Meanwhile, at the time of the instant non-compliance agreement, the tobacco industry is a third company.