1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 as well as 20% per annum from February 27, 2015 to the day of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 6, 2010, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff’s account, a representative director, C, the Defendant’s spouse and the attorney-at-law, to D’s account.

B. On April 12, 2010, the Defendant prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff a promissory note with a face value of KRW 100 million at the face value as of December 31, 2010 with respect to the said KRW 100 million.

B. On May 7, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted an investment agreement with the following contents.

The Plaintiff and E shall be referred to as “A”, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant shall be referred to as “B”.

1. A shall make a business registration under his/her name and make an investment in each household wholesale and retail business, etc. being carried on in the multi-dong or marina building located in the current Pakistan-si;

3. Ascertainment that Party A’s specific investment execution details of the amount previously invested or determined to be invested to Party B are as follows:

KRW 10 million on December 5, 2008, KRW 100 million on January 10, 2010, KRW 100 million on April 6, 2010, KRW 290 million on May 7, 2010.

5. B shall jointly and severally return 450 million won as investment profit for the amount invested by Gap.

6. The time to pay the investment profits referred to in paragraph (5) which he/she has to return to A shall be the time when he/she actually receives the compensation for purchase by consultation in consideration of the fact that the current location of his/her business site and business facilities are transferred to a G housing site development zone and that all of his/her business facilities are scheduled to be purchased by consultation and compensation for losses.

7. at the time set out in paragraph 6, Eul shall return to Gap an investment principal of KRW 590,000,000,000, other than the investment profit, as well as the investment principal.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In the case of a juristic act to which a judgment on the cause of the claim was attached, if it is reasonable to regard the failure to perform the obligation unless the facts indicated in the subsidiary do not occur, it shall be viewed as a condition and the facts indicated have occurred.