1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to the defendant A corporation 126,345,205 won and 86,027,202 won among them:

(b) the defendant.

1. The following facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or are recognized by comprehensively considering the purpose of the entire pleadings as a whole in each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 6 (including paper numbers):

A. The Plaintiff acquired the same claim against Defendant A, F, and G, as described in the grounds for the claim in the attached Form.

B. On May 18, 2012, F succeeded to the 1/3 shares of the deceased’s property by Defendant B and H, and I, who are their children. However, Defendant B, as Seoul Family Court 2012-Ma7069, filed a qualified acceptance report on the deceased’s inherited property on November 6, 2012. H and I reported the renunciation of inheritance on the deceased’s inherited property on October 9, 2012 by Seoul Family Court 2012-Ma7068, Seoul Family Court 2012-Ma7068.

C. G died on March 23, 2012, and Defendant C, his wife, inherited the deceased’s property by 3/7 and 2/7 shares of Defendant D and E, their children.

2. If so, Defendant A and Defendant A are jointly and severally liable to pay the money indicated in the order as the principal debtor, and Defendant B are jointly and severally liable with Defendant A, and Defendant C, D, and E are liable to pay the money indicated in the order equivalent to each inheritance share among the net F’s obligations, within the scope of the property inherited from the networkF.

(3) Of the claim claims, the claim against the Defendants of the Seoul Central District Court 2004Kadan107672 is a lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription and has interest in the lawsuit as a lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription.