1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants and the conjunctive claim against the defendant B added by this court.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 24, 2009, the Plaintiff remitted USD 1,399,91.89 to the account of friendly job offering D. D on September 30, 2009, and D transferred USD 1,330,000 (Korean Won KRW 1.56 billion, hereinafter “the instant money”).

B. From September 30, 2009 to September 30, 2014, “Defendant B borrowed KRW 1.566 million from the Plaintiff ($ 1.330,000) with a annual interest rate of 8% per annum from September 30, 2009 to September 30, 2014, and in addition, 25% interest per annum shall be paid upon the lapse of the period. In the event of nonperformance, the Plaintiff may provisionally seize Defendant B’s real estate and movable property (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”).

The “debtor” of the instant loan certificate is indicated as “(ju) Category B”, and the seal imprint of Defendant B’s seal imprint and the corporate seal imprint of Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) are affixed thereto, and Defendant B’s seal imprint and a copy of the passport are attached thereto.

C. On June 17, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Daejeon District Court for a payment order seeking the payment of the loan to the Defendants, along with the instant loan borrowing certificate.

The Defendants served on June 23, 2015 a payment order (Seoul District Court Hongsung Branch Branch 2015 tea 214) upon the Plaintiff’s above request and raised an objection against the above payment order on July 1, 2015.

Accordingly, this case was executed as a lawsuit.

On September 4, 2015, Defendant B filed the instant lawsuit by forging the instant loan certificate, and filed a complaint with the Plaintiff, and the prosecutor indicted the Plaintiff on charges of attempted fraud, forging private documents, uttering private investigation documents, and uttering private documents.

(Seoul Central District Court 2016Kadan1302). The Seoul Central District Court, August 11, 2016, intended to acquire money from the Defendant B by forging the instant loan certificate and filing the instant lawsuit along with it. However, the Defendant B raised an objection.