1. Defendant D’s KRW 650,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from March 10, 2008 to March 28, 2018.

1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant D

(a) The part corresponding to Defendant D in the separate sheet of the reasons for the claim to be indicated

(b) Judgment based on the recommendation of confession based on recognition (Articles 208(3)2 and 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Determination as to claims against Defendant B and C

A. Basic facts 1) The Plaintiff is a company that is established on April 29, 1996 and operates the manufacturing, sales, etc. of power generators. (2) Defendant B is a person who served as a director from July 24, 2007 to October 20, 2009.

On September 18, 2007, Defendant B acquired the Plaintiff’s 3.5 million shares (7.56%) and the management rights from Defendant D, but transferred the Plaintiff’s shares to E on October 9, 2009 1,746,627 shares (11.5%) and the management rights.

3) On March 10, 2008, the Plaintiff is F Co., Ltd. (former G Co., Ltd. before the change; hereinafter “F”).

) Around March 9, 2009, KRW 650,000 was determined and lent as the due date for reimbursement (hereinafter “instant loan”).

(ii) [The entry in the evidence of Nos. 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 22, and 24, as a basis for recognition, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. Defendant C’s assertion is a person who operates the Plaintiff through Defendant D, the representative director of the Plaintiff, with a former position as the substantial largest shareholder at the time of lending the instant funds, and is a person who instructs the execution of duties under Article 401-2 of the Commercial Act.

Defendant B and C, while jointly managing the Plaintiff, embezzled the Plaintiff’s funds by way of lending KRW 6.5 million to F, which is only a Pucom, on March 10, 2008.

Even if embezzlement is not established, Defendant B and C had extended the loan only without taking reasonable and reasonable measures to recover claims, by being aware that F had already lost its ability to repay debts and would cause damage to the Plaintiff if the loan was lent to the company.

Therefore, Defendant B and C are caused by intention or negligence on the damages suffered by the Plaintiff.