1. On October 8, 2014, B Co., Ltd.: (a) the par value of KRW 232,00,000,000 for the Defendant; (b) the payee, the place of issuance, and the place of payment for the Defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. As of April 1, 2016, the Plaintiff has 11 corporate tax and value-added tax bonds 771,358,410 won to B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Non-Party Company”).

B. On October 8, 2014, the Defendant issued a copy of a promissory note with a face value of 232,00,000 won from the non-party company, the payee, the issuer, the place of issuance, the place of payment, and the place of payment, respectively, and the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the place of payment, and the place of payment, and received a notarized deed from the non-party company to accept compulsory execution against the said Promissory

C. On November 11, 2014, the Defendant received an order of seizure and assignment from Seoul Northern District Court 2014TTTB2321 as to the claim for construction price against the Seoul Special Metropolitan City of the non-party company 203,719,960 won. The Defendant received KRW 126,019,960 from Seoul Special Metropolitan City according to the above assignment order, and the remainder KRW 77,700,000 was paid by the color industry development corporation, which is the subcontractor of the non-party company.

At the time of issuance of the Promissory Notes in this case by the non-party company, the above construction cost claim against Seoul Special Metropolitan City was the sole property.

E. The Defendant lent the name of the representative of D and E Co., Ltd. to C who actually operates the non-party company, and the Defendant’s Han Bank account was also managed by C.

【Fact that does not have any dispute】

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant issued the Promissory Notes and Notarial Deed in cooperation with C, and committed a fraudulent act against the plaintiff's non-party company. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant's act of issuing promissory Notes only to the non-party company whose debts are in excess of the debt, and preparing a notarial deed to accept compulsory execution constitutes a fraudulent act against other general creditors.

As to this, the defendant was issued the Promissory Notes in order to carry out the business in the insolvency of the non-party company.