1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to the Plaintiff’s Intervenor KRW 3,189,570,170 and three.

1. Determination as to the claim of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor

(a)as shown in the reasons for the attachment of the claim;

(However, the "creditor" and "debtor" are deemed to be the "Defendant" and the payment order against the debtor E was finalized on June 1, 2017. Meanwhile, the plaintiff transferred the claim for the loan of this case to the plaintiff succeeding intervenor on June 1, 2017, and notified it to the defendant Diplomatic Council, the main debtor of which is the plaintiff) / [the grounds for recognition] the items in subparagraphs 1 through 3, 1, and 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments.

B. As to the Defendants’ assertion 1), the Defendants asserted that, since the Suwon District Court 2016 Ma1050 decided on July 2, 2016, Defendant Acs. 2050, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with. However, the corporate rehabilitation procedure of Defendant Acs. 2 was decided on April 12, 2017, but the rehabilitation procedure of Defendant Acs. 2 was decided on August 2, 2017, and thus, the Defendants’ claim cannot be accepted.

2. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be accepted since it transferred the claim for the loan of this case to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff on June 1, 2017, which was pending in the instant lawsuit, to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff.

3. For this reason, the Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the Plaintiff’s claim.