1. The Defendants jointly set forth the Plaintiff KRW 174,00,000 and KRW 74,000 among them, from March 31, 2009, and from March 1, 100.

1. According to Gap evidence Nos. 1 (No dispute over the part signed by Defendant B, and the signature part of Defendant C is deemed to be the penology of Defendant C pursuant to the purport of the entire statement and pleading Nos. 3 and 4, the authenticity of the entire document is recognized. Defendant B may recognize the fact that the above loan certificate was made by the plaintiff's coercion, but no evidence exists to acknowledge it) of the judgment as to the cause of the claim. According to the statement of Defendant B, the Plaintiff on January 5, 2009, and KRW 100 million up to January 20, 2009, KRW 100 million up to February 27, 2009, KRW 100 million up to March 30, 2009, and KRW 100 million up to April 29, 2009, and Defendant C may recognize the fact that it guaranteed the above obligation.

Furthermore, although the Plaintiff alleged that the Defendants agreed to additionally pay KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff in addition to the above money, some of the above loan certificates, which seem consistent therewith, are merely based on the Plaintiff’s assertion itself, which is set forth on the premise of subsequent consultation due to disputes over the payment obligation between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B, and there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff and the Defendant B agreed to further pay KRW 50 million. Thus, it cannot be readily concluded that Defendant B agreed to additionally pay KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff solely on the part of the above loan certificate, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, unless there are special circumstances, the Defendants jointly do so and jointly, with the amount of KRW 174 million calculated by deducting KRW 226 million from the amount of the said KRW 400 million paid by the Plaintiff, etc. among the above KRW 400 million (the above KRW 226 million should be appropriated in the order of obligations first due) and the amount of KRW 74 million among them shall be appropriated from March 31, 2009, which is the day following the above payment period, to the extent of KRW 100 million from April 30, 2009, and from April 30, 2009, it is reasonable to dispute the existence and scope of each of the Defendants’ respective performance obligations from April 28, 2017.