1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff, and Defendant B from August 30, 2016 to Defendant C, and Defendant C from August 30, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;

(However, ‘creditor' is considered as ‘Plaintiff' and ‘debtor' as ‘Defendant'). 2. A claim against Defendant 1: a judgment by service by publication (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act).

3. Claim against Defendant 2: Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act, the Defendants were served with the original of the original payment order, and the subsequent written reply was not submitted, and the Plaintiff did not appear on the date for pleading, and therefore, all of the Plaintiff’s allegations were led to confession under Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act).

4. The Plaintiff seeking a payment for delay from the date of delivery of the duplicate of the complaint of this case. However, the obligation of the instant loan is not specified as the due date, and the Plaintiff is liable for delay of performance by the Defendants with a reasonable period fixed by the Plaintiff.

In addition, there is no other evidence to prove the fact that the Plaintiff notified the Defendants of the payment separately before the Plaintiff applied for the instant payment order. As such, from August 30, 2016, the day following the expiration of one month from July 29, 2016 when the copy of the instant complaint was served, Defendant B bears the responsibility for delay of payment from July 14, 2016, the day following the expiration of one month from June 13, 2016 when the original copy of the instant payment order was served.

Therefore, part of the claim for damages for delay is dismissed.