1. As to the Plaintiff A and B’s respective KRW 2,00,000, Plaintiff C’s KRW 1,500,000, and each said money, from September 6, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 7, 2016, Plaintiff C drafted a performance contract with the following contents (hereinafter “instant contract”) on June 16, 2016.

The actual accounts of the plaintiffs: The actual accounts term and performance period of the plaintiffs: The actual accounts of E beta, China (E Beijing, Whitena): F 8,00,000 won : The actual accounts payment method of performance fees: the sponsor E Beiwingna (hereinafter "A") shall pay the down payment amount equivalent to 50% of the performance fee of the performer (hereinafter "B") within three days before the event, and 30% of the performance fee shall be paid after 15 days from the beginning of the event, and 20% of the performance fee shall be paid to B through the following bank.

The actual duty of the contract: The contents of the contract prepared by mutual agreement between both parties shall be based, but may, if necessary, request modification of the contents of the contract after consultation.

A shall support B to facilitate his/her performance, have the right to manage and supervise the affairs of B related thereto, and B shall arrive at the performance place at least 60 minutes prior to the time of the performance.

The actual substance of the Doz. agent G is the plaintiffs.

B. The Defendant was operating F as an agent under the instant contract, and as such, mediated the Plaintiffs to prepare the instant contract.

C. The Plaintiffs received the down payment under the instant contract with their own account as indicated below.

Plaintiff B, on June 21, 2016, 200 KRW 2,000,000 on June 15, 2016, Plaintiff A, a remitter of the date of remittance of the voting recipient, KRW 2,000,000 on June 21, 2016, Plaintiff B, June 16, 2016, KRW 2,000,000 on June 21, 2016, Plaintiff C, June 3, 2016, KRW 1,000 on June 3, 2016, KRW 3,000,000 on June 8, 2016.

D. From June 21, 2016, the Plaintiffs began to work in E (hereinafter “instant club”) located in Vietnam (hereinafter “instant club”) from around June 21, 2016, and there was a dispute on the grounds that the content of the instant contract was different from that of the Plaintiff at the time of the formation of the instant contract, and the Plaintiffs were to work.