1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 96,609,891 and KRW 1,090,00 among them, Defendant A shall be from October 2, 2013 to the date of full payment.

1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant A

(a)as shown in the reasons for the attachment of the claim;

(b) Judgment on deemed confession of applicable provisions of Acts (Article 208 (3) 2 and Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. Basic facts 1) Defendant A’s ownership share in the real estate indicated in the separate sheet between Defendant B and his wife as of September 26, 201 (hereinafter “instant apartment ownership”) among the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment ownership”).

(2) As to the donation contract (hereinafter “instant donation contract”)

(2) On the same day, Defendant B entered into the instant apartment ownership transfer registration (hereinafter “instant ownership transfer registration”) with respect to the instant apartment shares in the District Court No. 61042.

(2) At the time of the instant donation contract, the instant apartment ownership was the only property of Defendant A.

Defendant B asserted that Defendant A owned 1/2 shares in the instant apartment at the time of the instant donation contract and owned 1/2 shares, and based thereon, Defendant B cited No. 15-12 (each automobile transfer certificate). However, considering that the date of the preparation of the said vehicle transfer certificate is “ October 10, 2012” and “ December 30, 2013,” it is difficult to recognize that Defendant A owned a vehicle on the said transfer certificate even at the time of the instant donation contract.

In addition, even if Defendant A owned the said vehicle at the time of the instant donation contract, there is no difference in the fact that Defendant A was omitted from the disposal of the instant apartment ownership due to the said transfer certificate, since the sum of the value of the vehicle is equivalent to KRW 11.4 million on the said transfer certificate.

3) At the time of the instant donation contract, Defendant A bears the Plaintiff’s obligation for loans worth not less than KRW 50 million and the obligation for non-material transactions with respect to the Plaintiff as described in the foregoing paragraph (a). Defendant A had no dispute over the grounds for recognition, as to the fact that there was no ground for recognition, Party A’s evidence No. 12, and the non-sip