1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. On July 2, 2003, the Plaintiff filed an application for the instant payment order on July 2, 2003, and the cause of the claim was the Plaintiff’s claim for the loan against the Defendants. The Defendants raised an objection on the 26th day of the same month after the Defendants received lawful delivery from November 24, 2015.

Accordingly, on November 8, 2016, when the lawsuit was pending, the Plaintiff withdrawn the previous argument and changed it to the Plaintiff’s claim for the agreed amount against the Defendants.

However, the change of the facts of the cause of the claim in a monetary payment claim constitutes a change in the lawsuit. As in this case, the change from the loan claim to the contract deposit claim constitutes a change in the exchange of lawsuit, and thus the former applicant made the withdrawal effective.

Therefore, the subject of the instant trial is the Plaintiff’s claim for the agreed amount against the Defendants.

2. Determination:

A. The facts of recognition 1) E is a G Co., Ltd. located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) around June 2000

(2) Around February 2003, Defendant B assumed office as the representative director of the non-party company and operated the non-party company while investing in the non-party company.

Therefore, the investors of the non-party company, including the plaintiff and E, forced the defendant B to be liable, and the defendants entered into an agreement on March 10, 2003 to compensate the plaintiff for damages related to the money invested in the non-party company.

3) On the same day, the Defendants made a promissory note with a face value of KRW 110 million on June 9, 2003 in the Plaintiff’s name, and issued to the Plaintiff a notary public No. 110 on the same day a notarial deed for the preparation of the HJoint Law Office (No. 110 on the same day). Meanwhile, on September 7, 2004, Defendant B was punished for a suspended sentence of two years by imprisonment with prison labor for the following reasons: (a) breach of trust in relation to the non-party company; (b) breach of trust in relation to the non-party company; (c) fabrication of private documents; and (d) uttering of the above investigation documents.