1. The Defendants jointly combine the Plaintiff with KRW 98,200,000, and as to this, Defendant A and Co., Ltd. from February 6, 2014.

1. According to the facts that there is no dispute between the parties to the determination as to the cause of the claim, or that there is no dispute between them, and according to the overall purport of each description, form, and pleading as stated in Gap's evidence 1-1 and 2, the Plaintiff issued one promissory note (hereinafter "the Promissory note in this case"), which is composed of the two forms of endorsement of the Promissory Notes in this case, and the Plaintiff's deposit and non-payment of the Promissory Notes in the face value of 98,200,000 won at the face value of July 25, 2013, the due date of February 6, 2014, the due date of the issuance, first-ro 7-37 (First-ro), the Bank of Korea's place of payment, the Bank of Korea's place of payment, and one Promissory Notes with the payee's agricultural products (hereinafter "the Promissory Notes in this case"), and the Plaintiff's deposit and non-payment of the Promissory Notes in this case.

According to the above facts, the Promissory Notes was lawfully issued, and it is evident that the endorsement from the addressee of the Promissory Notes to the Plaintiff, the holder of the Promissory Notes, is continuous, and the Plaintiff is presumed to be the lawful holder of the Promissory Notes. Thus, the Defendants, the endorser of the Promissory Notes, barring any special circumstance, shall be deemed to be the lawful holder of the Promissory Notes. Thus, the Defendants, the endorser of the Promissory Notes, as the performance of the duty of recourse, delivered to the Plaintiff the copy of the Promissory Notes from February 6, 2014, which was the due date of the payment of the Promissory Notes, to