1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) that exceeds the following order for payment.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs and the defendant are siblings, and the plaintiff A is punished by the defendant, and the plaintiff B is the defendant.

B. On September 6, 2007, the Defendant drawn up an explanatory note with the following content (hereinafter “instant text”).

“I will repay the remainder of KRW 70 million after receiving September 20, 2007 and deducting KRW 25.6 million later, the remainder of KRW 44 million. I will not pursue this work in the future.”

C. On November 14, 2007, Plaintiff A transferred each of KRW 10 million to the Defendant on November 30, 2007, while Plaintiff B transferred each of KRW 10 million to the Defendant on November 30, 2007.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiffs' main claim

A. The plaintiffs' assertion is obligated to pay KRW 44 million to the plaintiff A as stipulated in the letter of this case. Since the plaintiffs paid KRW 10 million to the defendant respectively, the defendant is ultimately obligated to pay the plaintiff A a total of KRW 54 million and KRW 10 million to the plaintiff B for the repayment of agreed money and loans.

B. The facts that the defendant agreed to pay KRW 44,400,000 to the plaintiff A on September 6, 2007 are as seen earlier. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay KRW 44,440,00 to the plaintiff A as stipulated in the letter of this case.

Furthermore, whether the Defendant borrowed KRW 10 million from each of the Plaintiffs, or not, each of the entries in the evidence No. 3-1 and No. 2-2, is only acknowledged that the Plaintiffs paid the Defendant each of KRW 10 million, and the Plaintiffs lent the said money to the Defendant exceeding this limit.

It is insufficient to recognize that the defendant is liable to pay the above money, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff A's claim is reasonable within the above scope of recognition, and the plaintiff B's claim is without merit.

C. The defendant's defense and judgment 1 are the defendant of this case.