1. The Defendant’s payment case for construction work against the Plaintiff at the Chuncheon District Court, Youngcheon District Court, Taecheon District Court, 2012 tea 30.

1. Basic facts

A. Title 1) The Defendant and the Plaintiff’s Intervenor constituted a joint supply and demand company with the gold Industry Co., Ltd., and subsequently dissolved around June 2005 (after the change of organization into the Plaintiff and dissolution of the Plaintiff);

The term "Plaintiff" is not classified before and after the organizational change.

C) The Construction Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “instant Construction Corporation”)

(2) As of December 10, 2008, the Defendant had a claim for the construction cost of KRW 9,027,900,000 with respect to the instant construction work (hereinafter “instant construction cost claim”) against the Plaintiff as of December 10, 208

(2) The Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order claiming payment of the instant construction price claim with the Chuncheon District Court Young-si Court Decision 2012j30, supra. On January 26, 2012, the said court ordered the Plaintiff to pay the Plaintiff the payment order with the content that “the obligor shall pay the obligee KRW 9,027,900,000, and the obligor shall pay the obligee damages and the expenses for demand procedure at the rate of 20% per annum from the day after the original copy of the payment order was served to the day of full payment.” The said payment order was served on the Plaintiff on February 2, 2012, and was finalized around that time.

(hereinafter “instant payment order”). B.

The Defendant, upon receipt of a decision on commencement of rehabilitation procedures with the Chuncheon District Court 2010 Ma1, May 17, 2010, following the rehabilitation procedures against the Defendant, was abolished on February 11, 201 (hereinafter “the first rehabilitation procedures”); and on April 11, 201, the decision on commencement of rehabilitation procedures again was revoked on January 26, 2012 (hereinafter “the second rehabilitation procedures”). In the second rehabilitation procedures, D was appointed as a custodian on April 11, 201, and on August 17, 201, the Defendant’s internal director, as a custodian, was newly appointed on August 17, 201.

C. The rehabilitation procedure against the Plaintiff and the instant lawsuit 1) the Plaintiff was ordered to commence the rehabilitation procedure on August 27, 2014 by the Seoul Central District Court 2014 Gohap10057 and 157 (combined) (F on the same day).