1. The defendant received KRW 91,331,470 from the plaintiff and then acquired real estate in the attached Form from the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a door-to-door sales contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant, the representative of the “C” operating the EL Plus Hand-on sales, etc., as follows:

Article 1 [Purpose of Contract] The purpose of this Agreement is to establish a business consignment relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant with respect to the sale of mobile communications wire goods performed by the Company, and to provide for the rights and obligations incidental thereto between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

Article 2 [Status of Plaintiff] The Plaintiff shall arrange for an individual entrepreneur to enter into a contract between the customer and the Defendant with respect to the goods provided by the Defendant, and shall pay allowances for marketing franchises prescribed in (agency Telecom) for the contract concluded.

Article 4 [Scope of Entrustment of Business Affairs] The scope of the Plaintiff's goods shall be determined by wire and wireless goods, Internet invitation, and separate sales policy table.

Article 8 [Prohibition of and Responsibility for Unfair Business] The plaintiff shall not engage in any unfair business, such as unauthorized use and embezzlement of devices, theft of names, TM, large-scale writing, large-scale payment, and forgery of identification cards, in the course of performing his/her duties in connection with this contract.

When a civil petition or VOC occurs, the plaintiff is responsible for and settled all of the responsibilities.

There is no difference between this contract and this contract with respect to TM contracts that the plaintiff is currently proceeding with the defendant.

Article 9 [Liability for Damages] The plaintiff shall compensate the defendant for any loss caused by the violation of the above 7 and 8 and for any property loss in the course of performing his/her duties.

The plaintiff shall provide the defendant with a maximum of KRW 100 million.

However, the collateral security provided by the plaintiff can be effective as much as the monetary damage of the defendant only when the plaintiff violated this contract, and only the "D company" and the transaction are valid.

In addition, the contract can not be exercised the collateral security.

B. The Plaintiff is the Defendant on May 20, 2013 under the instant contract.