1. The Defendants together with the Plaintiff KRW 275,000,000 and as to the Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B Co., Ltd. on July 20, 2018

1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;

2. Grounds;

(a) Defendant 6 and 8: Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

(b) Defendant 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7: Each judgment to be rendered for confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);

C. Defendant 4’s assertion that Defendant 4 (Co., Ltd. E) did not engage in direct transactions with the Plaintiff, and Defendant 5 did not return the bill to the Plaintiff but did not commit fraud. Thus, Defendant 4 asserted that there was no reason to pay the amount of the bill to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, as to the assertion that Defendant 4 did not have a direct transaction with the Plaintiff and that there was no obligation to file a lawsuit, comprehensively taking account of the following reasons: (a) Defendant 4’s endorsement on the bill of this case; (b) even if Defendant 4 did not have a direct transaction with the Plaintiff, Defendant 4 bears the duty of recourse as an endorser against the Plaintiff, who is the holder of the bill, even if he did not have a direct transaction with the Plaintiff, and thus, Defendant 4’s above assertion is without merit.

Next, as to the assertion that there is no reason to pay the amount of a bill by fraud from Defendant 5, Defendant 4’s above assertion appears to the purport of so-called “personal defense,” such as defect in declaration of intent constituting the act of a bill. There is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff, who is the holder of a bill, knowingly acquired the bill with the knowledge that it would prejudice the Defendant, who is the obligor, at the time of receiving endorsement transfer of the bill, along with the existence of such defenses. Thus, the above assertion by Defendant

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant 4 is accepted on the ground of the reasons.