1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to the Defendant C’s KRW 704,194,144 and its KRW 1,950,000 among them, the Defendant C’s corporation shall begin on April 25, 2013, and 1.

1. Claim against the defendant company and F

A. The part concerning Defendant Company and F in the re-appellant of the “reasons for Claim” attached to the indication of the claim is as follows.

(b) Judgment deemed confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Claim against Defendant D and E

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff asserted the granting of the power of representation as indicated in the grounds for the instant claim, as indicated in the separate sheet, concluded a debt agreement with the Defendant Company for the limit of transaction (hereinafter “instant limit transaction agreement”). At the time, Defendant D and E jointly guaranteed the Defendant Company’s obligation to the Plaintiff according to the instant limit transaction agreement during the period when the Defendant Company served as the representative director of the Defendant Company.

Defendant D and E, at the time of joint and several sureties’s joint and several sureties, had an employee as the representative director of the Defendant Company’s representative seal impression on the instant trade and joint and several sureties’s agreement (Evidence A No. 1) and issue a certificate of seal imprint and issue the certificate, the instant joint and several sureties agreement

Since then, pursuant to the instant guarantee agreement, the Plaintiff repaid the total sum of KRW 787,640,000 to the guaranteed creditors due to the waiver of the construction due to the Defendant Company’s default on payment of the contract deposit and the defect repair deposit to be paid by the Defendant Company to the guaranteed creditors, as indicated in the grounds for the claim.

Therefore, Defendant D and E jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for reimbursement amounting to KRW 75,860,00,00 for joint and several suretys of the Defendant Company and the Defendant Company, the principal debtor of the instant transaction agreement, and Defendant E is jointly and severally liable to pay damages for delay.

B) Even if Defendant D and E’s assertion of representation, the granting of power of representation is not recognized.

Even if Defendant D and E leave their seal imprint to the employees of the Defendant Company according to the Defendant Company’s practice, they bear responsibility by proxy for expressions under Article 125 of the Civil Act as long as they had concluded the instant joint and several guarantee agreement.

C) The assertion of ratification by proxy without authority is also made.