1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On January 7, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) transferred the right to operate, and the right to lease, etc. of the sales stores of automobile products operated by Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”); and (b) the Plaintiff transferred, to the Defendant, the building located in Nam-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-gu, and the building located in the building located in Nowon-gu, Ulsan-gu, and the building located in E and F; (c) as a result, the Plaintiff was paid KRW 150 million in total from the Defendant; and (d) sold the vehicle’s direction-setting KRW 300 million produced by the Plaintiff to the Defendant; and (e) around April 2015, the purchase price is KRW 50 million in total; and (e) around May of the same year, two promissory notes representing KRW 50 million in face value at face value, KRW 30 million in face value and KRW 20 million in face value; and (e) concluded a sales contract for each of the instant promissory notes (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. After that, according to the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff transferred the operating right and the right to lease of each of the above sales stores to the Defendant Company, and transferred the automobile direction-setting KRW 300 million to the Defendant Company.

C. On January 8, 2015, as indicated in the separate sheet, Defendant Company issued seven copies of promissory notes (hereinafter “each of the instant promissory notes”) with a total face value of 300 million won, and Defendant B issued each of the instant promissory notes with endorsement to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff is in possession.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, 4, and Eul No. 1 (including each number, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. With respect to the Plaintiff’s assertion that the parties concerned claim against the Defendants for payment of the total par value of each of the Promissory Notes in this case and damages for delay from each maturity of each of the said Promissory Notes, the Defendants are all the said respective Promissory Notes.