1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B is the representative director of the Company E (hereinafter “E”), Defendant C is the executive director of the Company E, and Defendant C is the person who owned the shares listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant shares”) in which the shares were not issued as a director of the Company E.

B. On August 31, 200, the Defendants, while jointly establishing E, appointed D as a director and held D the title trust of 20,000 shares out of the shares of this case.

C. On February 24, 2012, the Plaintiff lent KRW 100 million to D as of March 25, 2012, and was not repaid KRW 55 million out of the above loans.

D’s creditors, including the Plaintiff, agreed on April 2, 2012 to terminate the title trust of the instant shares with the Defendants, and transferred the title of ownership of the instant shares to the Defendants by entering into each share transfer contract (hereinafter “each share transfer contract”) with respect to 10,000 shares out of the instant shares.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4 through 10, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The Plaintiff asserted that each of the instant share transfer contracts constitutes a fraudulent act and sought revocation of each of the instant shares transfer contracts and restitution thereof by filing a lawsuit in the instant case.

As to this, the Defendants knew that the respective share transfer contract of this case was fraudulent at the latest around June 26, 2013, and asserted that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful by the lawsuit filed for three years from that time.

B. Determination 1) The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 2, 7, 13, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3 (including paper numbers) and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3 (including paper numbers). Eul already entered into each of the instant share transfer contracts to the plaintiff who intends to provisionally seize the instant shares around July 18, 2012.