1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall pay to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) KRW 400,000,000, and shall be paid in full from June 4, 1996.

1. Judgment on the plaintiff's main claim

A. On May 17, 2006, the defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff for a loan with the Seoul Central District Court. On September 8, 2006, the above court rendered a judgment (2006Gahap42080) that "the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 400,000,000 won and 24% interest per annum from June 1, 2003 to the date of full payment" (2006Gahap42080). The above judgment became final and conclusive on September 27, 2006 (hereinafter "the judgment of this case").

(2) On October 13, 2010, the Plaintiff filed a petition for bankruptcy with the Daegu District Court 2010Hadan6780, and filed a petition for immunity with the same court 2010Hadan6780.

On July 26, 2011, the Plaintiff was declared bankrupt and released from immunity, and the decision to grant immunity (hereinafter “instant decision to grant immunity”) became final and conclusive on August 13, 201.

3) At the time, the Plaintiff’s list of creditors included the claims of the Daegu Bank, the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund, the Daegu Credit Guarantee Fund, the Korea Trade Insurance Corporation, and the Korea Trade Insurance Corporation, and the Defendant did not state the Defendant’s claim. The Defendant’s claim did not state the grounds for recognition. The Plaintiff’s claim was not stated in the fact that there was no dispute

B. Where a decision to grant immunity to the debtor on the grounds of the claim becomes final and conclusive, the debtor shall be exempted from all obligations owed to the bankruptcy creditor [the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “ Debtor Rehabilitation Act”).

) Articles 565 and 566 main text of the above fact-finding. According to the above fact-finding, the decision to grant immunity to the Plaintiff becomes final and conclusive, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant’s liability for the Plaintiff regarding the claim for judgment of this case is

C. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s defense 1) The summary of the defense that the instant judgment claim was the damage claim for the tort committed by the Plaintiff intentionally, and was used by the Plaintiff by deceiving the Defendant, thereby deceiving the Defendant totaling KRW 418,00,000, and assaulting the Defendant.