1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff (Law Firm C, December 12, 2014) is a promissory note No. 1910, signed on December 12, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 12, 2014, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note at sight on December 12, 2014 (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) at the issuer, Plaintiff’s representative director D, Defendant, and Promissory Notes at KRW 300,000,000, and the issue date on December 12, 2014 (hereinafter “instant promissory note”). On the same day, the said issuer issued a promissory note at sight on December 12, 2014 (hereinafter “instant promissory note”). On the same day, the said issuer is the issuer and the name and seal of the instant promissory note, and if the payment is delayed with the holder of the instant promissory note, a notary public, who, without delay, is aware of the absence of objection, on December 12, 2014.”

B. On January 20, 2015, the Plaintiff paid 200,000,000 won to the Defendant as the secured debt of the notarial deed, but did not receive a refund of the notarial deed from the Defendant, the Plaintiff concluded a loan for consumption with the Defendant on January 23, 2015 (e.g., February 22, 2015), and (e., February 11, 2015 (e., March 10, 2015), with each of the above loan for consumption with the term “the loan for consumption” as stipulated in each of the above loan for consumption with the term “the loan for consumption with the Defendant on August 12, 2015” (e.g., each of the loan for consumption with the term “the loan for consumption with the term “the term “the term of repayment” as stipulated in each of the loan for consumption with the term of repayment on September 23, 2015,” respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 and 2.