1. A notarized deed No. 91 of March 21, 2013 by the Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff is a No. 91 of March 21, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 21, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, who were married couple, drafted the following agreements (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

Agreements

1. The Plaintiff shall issue to the Defendant a promissory note with a maturity of three years from the date of preparation of the written agreement, and notarized.

2. The plaintiff and the defendant shall liquidate living together within one month from the date of preparation of the written agreement and separate living for three years.

3. The plaintiff and the defendant do not bring about civil or criminal problems against each individual during the period of his/her stay, do not interfere with all his/her lives, and do not mention the issues between others.

4. If the Plaintiff violated the agreement under the above paragraph (3), the Plaintiff may not raise an objection against this even if the Defendant immediately executes a promissory note, and if the Defendant violated the agreement, the promissory note under the above paragraph (1) shall be null and void

B. The Plaintiff issued, pursuant to Article 1 of the Agreement, a promissory note (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) to the Defendant on March 21, 2013, stating that “the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff, and the date of issuance, issued, issued, issued, on March 21, 2013.”

On the same day, a notary public prepared a notarial deed to the effect that “if the payment of a promissory note is delayed, compulsory execution shall be accepted” (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) under the No. 91 of the No. 2013 Deed No. 2013.

C. On September 16, 2015, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a provisional attachment on the real estate owned by the Plaintiff with respect to the claim for the Promissory Notes claim, and received a decision of acceptance on September 30, 2015 (Seoul Northern District Court 2015Kadan4345).

In addition, on September 18, 2015, the decision of recommending reconciliation was finalized on December 11, 2015 to the effect that "the plaintiff and the defendant are divorced" by filing a lawsuit of divorce against the plaintiff (Korean Government District Court 2015ddan7511).

[Ground of recognition] There is no dispute.