1. As to Defendant A and B’s joint and several liability for KRW 171,922,459 and KRW 170,018,263 among them, Defendant A and B’s joint and several liability for damages incurred to the Plaintiff on November 12, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. Credit guarantee agreement and loan 1) Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A Co., Ltd”).

(B) On April 26, 2012, between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, KRW 170 million of the guaranteed principal and April 26, 2013 of the guaranteed principal (the subsequent date was changed to April 25, 2014).

(i)the credit guarantee agreement specified in the credit guarantee agreement (hereinafter referred to as the “credit guarantee agreement of this case”).

1) The Korean Bank (hereinafter referred to as the “Korea Bank”)

(2) According to the credit guarantee agreement of this case, the Plaintiff paid a loan of KRW 200 million from the Plaintiff as collateral. (2) According to the credit guarantee agreement of this case, when the Defendant Company is unable to repay its loan obligations, the Defendant Company shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of the payment by subrogation and the amount of damages for delay calculated by the Plaintiff at a fixed rate (12%) from the date of the payment by subrogation to the date of the full payment by subrogation, and the

Defendant B jointly and severally guaranteed all obligations that Defendant Company owes to the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant credit guarantee agreement.

B. On October 21, 2013, the Defendant Company lost the benefit of time due to delay in payment of the loan. The Plaintiff, on November 12, 2013, subrogated to the Bank the total amount of KRW 171,01,243 in accordance with the instant credit guarantee agreement, and recovered KRW 992,980,00. The amount of finalized damages incurred with respect to the amount of recovery is KRW 326,00.2) The Plaintiff spent the amount of KRW 1,903,870 at the expense of preserving the claim.

C. The Defendant Company decided to commence rehabilitation procedures on November 7, 2013 as Seoul Central District Court 2013 Ma202, but the said court rendered a decision to discontinue the rehabilitation procedures on the ground that the value at the time of liquidation of the Defendant Company’s business would obviously exceed the value at the time of continuing the business.

The above abolition ruling was finalized on February 4, 2014. D.

The defendant company that entered into a sales contract shall be the defendant on January 24, 2014 when it exceeds its obligation.