1. On May 15, 2014, the Defendant registered the Seoul Central District Court with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. At around 2012, upon C’s request, the Plaintiff delegated the authority to sell each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by C (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and to create collateral.

B. C, at the request of D to make a financing on March 10, 2014, after having experienced difficulties in selling the instant real estate or securing loans, issued to D documents necessary for the disposition of acting as an agent for the instant real estate, such as the Plaintiff’s power of attorney (Evidence No. 2), the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression issued on the same date (Evidence No. 3), and the Plaintiff’s power of attorney (Evidence No. 4) prepared as of March 15, 2014.

C. On May 15, 2014, D entered into a mortgage agreement with the Defendant as to the instant real estate, which is KRW 500 million (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant, the Defendant, D, the person establishing the right to collateral security, the Plaintiff, and the maximum debt amount. On the same day, D borrowed KRW 300 million from the Defendant after completing the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “instant registration”) with the Seoul Central District Court’s registration No. 108650, supra.

D On October 25, 2016, it was prosecuted with the Seoul Central District Court on the charge that “after completing the registration of this case in violation of the Plaintiff’s duty without the Plaintiff’s consent, it borrowed KRW 300 million, thereby acquiring property benefits and causing losses equivalent to the same amount to the Plaintiff,” and the trial of the first instance is in progress.

(2016Gohap1084). [Grounds for recognition] / [Ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, described in Gap evidence 1 through 7, described in Eul evidence 2, 3 and 4 (including branch numbers), witness E’s witness E’s testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 is that C merely delegated D the right to arrange the sale of the instant real estate and the secured loan.

The contract of this case is ultimately an act of unauthorized representation of D.