1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Defendants jointly share KRW 225,000,000 and for this, from September 5, 2014 to August 30, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the parties is a company established for the purpose of manufacturing painting facilities, etc., and Defendant A is a person operating metal funeral business in the trade name of “B,” and the name of the Defendant District T&C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant District T&C”) is a company registered as an enterprise specialized in energy saving pursuant to the Energy Use Rationalization Act as an enterprise specialized in energy saving (Eergy Services Company, ESCO) and established for the purpose of planning and designing business, etc.

B. On March 25, 2013, Defendant A entered into an ESCO performance guarantee contract between Defendant A and Defendant B&C, setting the installation period from April 1, 2013 to March 31, 2014; and directly setting the installation cost of KRW 2.4 billion (value added tax); and installing the installation cost in Defendant A’s new factory; and the energy saving effect from the use of the equipment falls short of the energy saving effect guaranteed by Defendant B&C, the difference shall be paid to Defendant A; and if exceeding, the amount equivalent to the excess amount shall be paid to Defendant B, the ECO investment guarantee agreement (hereinafter “performance guarantee agreement”).

C. Defendant A’s loan, etc. 1) The term “Defendant A” means Article 14 of the Energy Use Rationalization Act, Article 27 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and the financial support guidelines for the Energy Use Rationalization Project (Public Notice No. 2013-23, hereinafter “Financial Support Guidelines”).

Pursuant to Article 8, the Energy Management Corporation has applied for the recommendation of funds.

On May 3, 2013, the Energy Management Corporation is the name of the business to Defendant A, the “ESCO-Performance Guarantee Agreement”, the “direct heating winding books”, the recommended amount, and the name of the contractor.