1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts below the basis of facts do not conflict between the parties or may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 8, 9, 13, 14, and 15.

On August 4, 2009, Nonparty D drafted a promissory note No. 42 of 2009 (hereinafter “instant promissory note No. 42 of 2009”) with a face value of one billion won from Nonparty E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), the date of issuance August 4, 2009, and the date of payment.

B. After November 17, 2009, D transferred the Notarial Deed of the Promissory Notes to Defendant B.

(hereinafter “transfer of this case”). (c) The transfer of this case

D On May 13, 2016, between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on May 13, 2016, under the premise that the said transfer price was KRW 1 billion and paid KRW 300 million among the said transfer price claim against Defendant B, 50 million out of the said transfer price claim against Defendant B and ancillary claim were transferred to the Plaintiff.

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The transfer proceeds of the Notarial Deed of Promissory Notes (hereinafter “the transfer proceeds of this case”).

(2) The Defendants paid KRW 1 billion to D at the time of the transfer of the instant promissory note to the “Agreement on the Transfer of Bonds (Evidence A)” prepared between D and Defendant B, and it is apparent in that the transfer price is KRW 1 billion. Moreover, while there were no other debt, E, the obligor of the instant promissory note, which is the obligor of the instant obligation, and there were many active assets, including convertible bonds, and there were sufficient financial resources to repay. The Defendants required the instant promissory note in order to utilize it for the acquisition of management rights, and it is apparent that the instant promissory note was returned to E in the course of the actual acquisition of management rights, in lieu of the payment of KRW 1 billion for the acquisition price of management rights. 2) The Defendants paid only KRW 300 million out of the transfer price of the instant promissory note to D, it is obvious in view of the circumstances such as the fact that the Defendants paid only KRW 1 billion out of KRW 1 billion,000