1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff; and (b) 5% per annum from December 8, 2015 to October 27, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that executed D (hereinafter “instant golf course”) located in the Ilcheon-si C, and the Defendant is a person who belongs to the “D Shareholders’ Council” comprised of the persons who become E shareholders according to the rehabilitation plan authorized in the rehabilitation procedure for E (Korean Government District Court 2011 Ma28) after obtaining the instant golf course membership from E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) or acquiring the membership from a third party.

B. (1) Since around 2007, E, including the operation of the golf course and the rehabilitation procedure, had been established and operated for the golf course in this case, but the PF loans were not repaid due to failure in the sale of membership, and the decision was rendered by the Jung-gu District Court on December 9, 201.

However, the instant golf course site and ground buildings were sold by public auction, and the F Co., Ltd., the Plaintiff’s subsidiary company (hereinafter “F”) was awarded a successful bid on the wind that E cannot repay its obligations according to the rehabilitation plan approved in the rehabilitation procedure.

F around February 28, 2014, the Gyeonggi-do Governor approved the modification of the business plan with respect to the instant golf course from E to F, and currently operates the instant golf course in the name of “G”.

(2) In light of the fact that the instant golf course, which is a major business asset of E on January 29, 2014, was sold in the public sale procedure and became unable to generate profits through the golf course business, it is evident that E is unlikely to implement the rehabilitation plan.

In light of this, the decision was made to discontinue the rehabilitation procedure for E.

(3) The shareholders of E filed a lawsuit, such as an appeal and reappeal on the discontinuation decision of the rehabilitation procedure, an application for revocation of the authorization decision of the rehabilitation plan, and a claim for revocation of the approval decision of the above business plan, but each of the above cases.