1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 262,939,048 and KRW 7,888,171 among the Defendants’ 262,939,048 and KRW 7,88,171 on December 31, 2016.

1. The allegations and judgment of the parties

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

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 7, Eul evidence 1 to 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. 1) The Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant A is without dispute between the parties. 2) We examine the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B.

A) As seen in the grounds for the separate claim, the non-party company, according to the rehabilitation plan authorized in the Seoul Central District Court 2015 Ma100038 rehabilitation case, decided to convert its debt into equity in lieu of repayment of 550,800,000 won out of 810,000,000 of the principal of the debt owed to the plaintiff (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da70121, Jan. 23, 2014) and the obligation owed by the company established by division pursuant to Article 530-9(1) of the Commercial Act is a quasi-joint and several liability (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da95769, Aug. 26, 2010). Considering that the repayment effect of the non-party company, a quasi-joint and several joint and several debtor, on the part of the defendant company B, and that the exemption of the principal obligation extended to the non-party joint and several liability

3) However, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against the Defendants constitutes a future performance suit, and Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings does not apply to the lawsuit under Article 251 of the Civil Procedure Act, so it is reasonable to apply 5% per annum under the Civil Act. Accordingly, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the amount set forth in paragraph (1) of this Article.

3. Conclusions.