1. The Defendant’s loan to the Plaintiff is based on the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014Gahap2433 Decided November 21, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. In the loan case of this Court 2014Gahap2433 against the Plaintiff, who is the representative director of the Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”), the Defendant received a favorable judgment (hereinafter “the loan of this case”) from the Defendant (the Plaintiff) for KRW 200,000,000 and KRW 130,000 among them, for KRW 130,000 from December 17, 2012; KRW 70,000,000 from April 17, 2013 to March 27, 2014; and KRW 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.”

The above judgment became final and conclusive on December 11, 2014.

B. C was decided to commence rehabilitation procedures on October 31, 2014 by Seoul Central District Court 2014 Ma177, and the Plaintiff was appointed as a custodian, and thereafter the rehabilitation plan was decided on February 27, 2015, and the rehabilitation procedure was completed on February 14, 2018 after being decided to authorize the rehabilitation plan to be revised on January 12, 2018.

C. When the Defendant reported C’s loan claim as a rehabilitation claim in the above rehabilitation procedure, the Plaintiff denied the Defendant’s claim on the ground that it is the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff’s individual, and the Defendant filed an application for the final claim inspection judgment with Seoul Rehabilitation Court 2015

On November 1, 2017, the above court affirmed that “The Defendant’s rehabilitation claim against C is KRW 200,000,000,000,000 per annum 24% per annum from December 17, 2012 to March 27, 2014, calculated at the rate of KRW 39,83,424 won per annum from April 17, 2013 to March 27, 2014, the settlement of KRW 15,879,452, and KRW 200,000,000, calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from March 28, 2014 to October 30, 2014, the settlement of KRW 20,000,00,000 was 20,000,000,000,000,000 per annum 237,281.”

The amount of rehabilitation claims against the defendant C who recognized the decision to recommend reconciliation of this case is against the plaintiff of the defendant who recognized the loan of this case.