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

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

E As from May 1, 2010, the Plaintiff Company was on duty and died on January 1, 2017 (hereinafter “the deceased”), and the Defendants’ heir as the deceased did not have any dispute.

Plaintiff

The main points of the arguments are as follows.

① In other words, the deceased agreed to designate and register non-performing loans due to the failure of his customer, etc. at the time of the deceased’s work as “Y Code” (Evidence No. 3), and to compensate the Plaintiff for the relevant amount of credit so registered (Evidence No. 1, 2). The Defendants, the deceased’s heir, shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 7,353,884 (the remaining amount excluding the extinguished amount of credit) as indicated in the current status data (Evidence No. 6-1, 2) in which the amount of credit was adjusted, and ② Defendant D is liable to pay KRW 4,646,156 to the Plaintiff.

Although there is evidence supporting the plaintiff's assertion 1, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the stamp image of the deceased's name affixed to the above document is either the deceased's stamp image or the deceased's seal is affixed (In conclusion, the stamp image of the deceased mentioned in the evidence No. 3 is the same as that of the deceased's stamp image stated in the evidence No. 4, which appears in writing as a document stating additional contents in the evidence No. 2, and it cannot be used as evidence, and the remaining evidence of the plaintiff is insufficient to recognize the fact that the deceased agreed to compensate for the amount of claims as alleged by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the facts of the plaintiff's assertion 2.

Ultimately, each of the above arguments by the plaintiff is without merit.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.