1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant A’s KRW 99,542,443 and KRW 40,187,103 among them:

B. Defendant B is Defendant A.

1. Indication of claims: To be as shown in the attached Form;

2. Grounds;

(a) Defendant A: Descriptions of the evidence of 1-1, 2, 2, 3, 4-1 through 3, 5, 6-1, 2, and 7 through 9, respectively;

(b) Defendant B: Judgment based on the recommendation of confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. Defendant A’s assertion argues that Defendant A did not receive each loan from the Ulsan Happiness Credit Union and the Ulsan-Namnam Credit Union because Defendant A did not prepare evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2-1-2.

If the authenticity of the seal imprinted by the seal imprinted in the document is reproduced by the seal of the person who prepared the document, barring any special circumstance, the authenticity of the seal imprint shall be presumed to have been created, i.e., the act of affixing the seal is based on the will of the person who prepared the document. Once the authenticity of the seal is presumed, the authenticity of the document shall be presumed to have been created in accordance with Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act. If the authenticity of the document is presumed to have been created, the authenticity shall not be denied unless the person

According to the statement of Gap evidence Nos. 8, since the defendant A's seal affixed with Gap evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2-2 is recognized as being based on the above defendant's seal imprint, the authenticity of the whole document is presumed, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the seal of the defendant A was stolen or forged, the defendant A's assertion is without merit.