1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) are dismissed.

2. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) raises an objection.

In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant’s consent to return all relevant documents, such as the instant notarial deed, etc., and the Defendant prepared a performance memorandum (hereinafter “instant performance memorandum”) on January 27, 2014, and sent it to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff A received the instant performance memorandum on January 28, 2014.

The main contents of the instant performance memorandum are as follows.

The request of A of this administrative letter: The 30 million won shall be deposited into the B passbook account immediately upon arrival, and the 20 million won shall be deposited into the B passbook account from February 15, 2014 after being loaned by February 15, 2014.

The related documents shall be returned if the above amount, 3,000 won is deposited.

B will draw up a letter of performance at the request of the above A.

First: Upon the arrival of the registration, three million won shall be deposited, and Second: upon deposit by the Gu million won by February 15, I shall return the relevant documents as requested by A.

The validity of the letter of performance: The letter of performance written by B shall be null and void if it becomes known that the first and second execution of the first and second execution of the A was made from January 28, 2014 to February 15, 2014.

E. On February 13, 2014, the Plaintiffs paid KRW 39 million to the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2 to 5, Eul evidence 1, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. Plaintiffs 1) After the Plaintiff received the instant performance memorandum, the Defendant sent text messages to the Plaintiffs, and suspended the payment period of KRW 30 million on the instant performance memorandum. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs paid KRW 39 million to the Defendant on February 13, 2014 (i.e., KRW 39 million (= KRW 20 million) on a lump sum basis, and completed reimbursement in accordance with the instant performance memorandum.

The execution rejection of the instant case is a content that the Plaintiffs would settle all obligations between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant by paying KRW 39 million as above. Thus, the Defendant’s underlying claim and promissory note against the Plaintiffs are all the claims.