1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to the Plaintiff KRW 600,000,000, and Defendant B Co., Ltd. with respect thereto from November 10, 2015.

In fact, D, the spouse of the Plaintiff, lent KRW 600 million to Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) on November 23, 201.

I confirm that the above amount was borrowed from you in part of 23 November 201, 201, the loan certificate of 600 million won by Plaintiff your, and shall be repaid by adding the interest prescribed by the end of July 2012.

If shares are purchased on credit from a securities company traded with a thickness even before the redemption date, I will bear the interest to be borne by the securities company with a thickness.

On January 30, 2012, Defendant CD and the Defendants, the joint and several surety of Defendant B, prepared a loan certificate (hereinafter “instant loan certificate”) with the following content as follows.

【In the absence of dispute, there is no ground for recognition, the entry of No. 1, and No. 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings, and the plaintiff alleged by the party to the judgment shall seek payment of KRW 600 million jointly and severally to the defendants according to an agreement based on the loan certificate of this case.

As to this, the Defendants asserted that the above KRW 600 million is D, despite the contents of the loan certificate in this case, the actual obligee is unable to comply with the Plaintiff’s request.

Judgment

If the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, unless it is recognized that there was an express or implied agreement different from the content written in the document by reflect, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the content written in the document, and shall not reject it without any reasonable reasoning (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da1013, Jan. 21, 2000). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the health care provider and the Defendants expressed to the Plaintiff the intent to reimburse the Plaintiff KRW 600,000,000 borrowed from D, such as the content written in the instant loan certificate, and this agreement is indivisible between D and the Plaintiff as well as D.