1. Defendant D: (a) KRW 200 million for each of the Plaintiffs and 20% per annum from June 10, 2014 to September 30, 2015; and (b)

1. Basic facts

A. The E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) intended to enter into a contract with the Korea Land Corporation to purchase a parcel of land F in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, and 11 (hereinafter “instant land”). However, there was a shortage of KRW 200 million out of the purchase price.

B. On May 2006, Defendant D, who is a director of E and a real director, explained to the above Plaintiff on May 2, 2006 that “this case’s land may be purchased and transferred to another person, thereby obtaining a large amount of profit.”

C. The Plaintiffs transferred KRW 100,000,000 to Defendant C’s deposit account on May 24, 2006 and May 25, 2006, and was issued by Defendant C with the following letter of commitment (hereinafter “instant letter of commitment”).

In order to use the above amount as a part of the down payment in purchasing the instant land owned by the Korea Land Corporation (400,000,000) of the letter of payment agreement, Defendant C borrowed the full payment of KRW 200,000,000 (200,000) by deposit from Defendant C in an E new bank passbook from Defendant C, and thereby promises to pay the total amount of KRW 400,000,000 (40,000) by November 26, 2006, the total amount of KRW 200,000,000 (40,000) of the total amount of the down payment (40,000,000) is to be paid by November 26, 2006. If you

Attachment on May 25, 2006: The purport of the whole of the arguments and arguments as follows: (a) the fact that there is no dispute over Defendant C Ha [based] of the guarantor E (corporate reduction) who is a copy of the corporate certificate of seal imprint attached; (b) the statement under subparagraphs 1 and 2; (c) the statement under subparagraph 1; (d) the statement under subparagraph 1

2. Judgment on the grounds of claim

A. Although the instant letter of claim against Defendant D was written to the effect that Defendant C would receive money from Defendant C, it would be paid to Defendant C, as seen earlier, Defendant D, the actual owner of the instant letter of payment, directly talks about Plaintiff B or about the purchase of the instant land, as seen earlier. Accordingly, Plaintiff B or the instant letter of claim against Defendant D, as a matter of course, were to purchase the instant land.