1. A notary public who belongs to the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) of the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) was prepared on May 18, 2016.

The main lawsuit and counterclaim are also examined.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff borrowed KRW 6,000,000 from the Defendant on July 12, 2015, and repaid KRW 11,000,000 on the 20th day of the same month, and the total of KRW 4,000,000 on August 18, 2015, and KRW 30,000 from the Defendant again around September 2015.

B. On May 18, 2016, the Plaintiff issued to the Defendant a promissory note with a face value of KRW 80,000,000, and the due date of August 17, 2016 with respect to the above loan obligations, and a promissory note notarial deed stating the purport of recognizing the absence of objection even if the Plaintiff is subject to compulsory execution (hereinafter “instant execution deed”).

C. The Defendant, while operating a cafeteria with the trade name “C”, was supplied with the Plaintiff with the Korea-Japan and Korea-Japan. The Defendant did not pay KRW 21,636,450 out of the amount of goods for the Korea-Japan, etc. supplied by the Plaintiff until August 5, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, Gap evidence No. 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The execution certificate of this case is written on the above loan claims held by the defendant against the plaintiff, and there is no dispute between the parties as to the claim amounting to KRW 69,00,000,000 after deducting the amount repaid under the above paragraph 1-A, not in the amount of KRW 80,000.

The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant’s loan claims against the Plaintiff and the goods price claims against the Defendant are set-off.

On August 17, 2016, both claims against the plaintiff's goods payment claim against the defendant and the defendant's loan claim against the plaintiff were set off against the plaintiff.

In addition, as a copy of the complaint of this case containing the Plaintiff’s declaration of set-off reaches the Defendant on June 8, 2017, the Defendant’s claim for loans against the Plaintiff is retroactively against August 17, 2016, which is the set-off date.