1. The Defendant’s KRW 48,246,412 as well as 5% per annum from August 11, 2016 to September 8, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 28, 2011, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against Taedo General Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “T Taedo Construction”) for the claim for settlement of accounts, and on July 28, 2011, the Defendant rendered a judgment that “I pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated by the rate of KRW 297,767,210 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from May 24, 2011 to the date of full payment” (Seoul District Court Branch Branch Decision 2011Gahap1391). The judgment became final and conclusive on August 19, 201.

B. On August 8, 2013, the Defendant: (a) filed an application for attachment and assignment order with respect to the Plaintiff’s claim (such as the settlement money, etc. related to the construction of a multi-purpose apartment on the ground of the occupation village 462-3 above-mentioned) with respect to the said final judgment as an executive title; and (b) received attachment and assignment order (the Incheon District Court 2013Tan District Court 24561) on August 12, 2013; and (c) the order was served on the Plaintiff, a garnishee, on August 29, 2013, and became final and conclusive on September 12, 2013.

C. On September 9, 2013, the Defendant filed an application for provisional seizure on September 24, 2013 with respect to the Defendant’s right to claim the transfer of real estate ownership against the Korea Land Trust Co., Ltd. with respect to the claim for the full amount claim based on the said final judgment. A provisional seizure was executed around that time.

On January 13, 2016, the first instance court accepted the Plaintiff’s claim that there is no claim subject to attachment and assignment order, and rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s claim (In Incheon District Court Decision 2014Gahap641), and the appellate court also rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s appeal on July 21, 2016 (Seoul High Court Decision 2016Na2613).

On June 7, 2012, the Defendant: (a) prepared and proposed a certificate to the effect that the Plaintiff would pay KRW 350,000,000 to Thai Construction (Evidence No. 4 of this case); (b) asserted that the entire claim exists; and (c) the first instance court and the appellate court have issued such certificate.