1. The Defendants were Seoul Central District Court Decision 201Gahap43780 decided October 18, 2013 (main office) with respect to Nonparty G.

1. Indication of claim;

A. On February 13, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a trade reservation (hereinafter “instant trade reservation”) with G as to 7/18 shares of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and completed the provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of all shares in the name of the Plaintiff on the same day (hereinafter “provisional registration of this case”).

B. On December 27, 2013, the Defendants asserted that the instant reservation constituted a fraudulent act, and filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff on December 27, 2013, the Seoul Central District Court 2013Da519437, and the said lawsuit was proceeding by public notice, and on July 16, 2014, rendered a judgment to the effect that “the instant reservation was revoked. The Plaintiff shall comply with the procedure for the cancellation registration of the instant provisional registration.”

C. On September 17, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a subsequent appeal against the said judgment, and on March 30, 2017, the Seoul Central District Court (2015Na57682), the appellate court, rendered a judgment revoking the judgment of the first instance and dismissing the lawsuit.

On July 11, 2017, the above judgment was rendered by the Supreme Court of Korea as 2017Da226162 and became final and conclusive. D.

Meanwhile, on October 18, 2013, the Defendants were forced to commence compulsory sale of the instant real estate as H by the Seoul Central District Court on August 18, 2015 based on the executory exemplification of the Seoul Central District Court Decision 201Gahap43780 (Mains) and 2012Gahap4812 (Counterclaim).

E. Accordingly, the Plaintiff, as the person holding the provisional registration of this case, sought a non-permission of the above compulsory execution against the Defendants.

2. Applicable provisions of Acts: The judgment on deemed confessions (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act) sought to be present on the first date for pleading and dismiss a claim, but the defendant F did not appear on the second date for pleading without submitting a written answer that specifically addresses the causes of the plaintiff's claim.