1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. Basic facts

A. From April 6, 2016 to June 21, 2016 on the Plaintiff’s corporate register, H, G, and F were registered as an internal director, and H was registered as a representative director. On June 21, 2016, the registration of dismissal of F among the above internal directors was completed, and on July 5, 2016, the registration of dismissal of the inside director and the representative director H, G, and the registration of appointment of the inside director F was completed, respectively. As such, F was registered as the only internal director from July 5, 2016 to October 14, 2016.

B. As seen earlier, F, as the Plaintiff’s representative, was registered as the Plaintiff’s sole internal director on July 29, 2016, as the Plaintiff’s representative, issued a promissory note with a face value of KRW 200 million at the face value as of October 29, 2016, which was issued by the Plaintiff. On the same day, a notary public accepting compulsory execution based on the said promissory note was also drafted in the No. 543 of the No. 543 of the No. 2016.

C. Likewise, on August 31, 2016, F, as the Plaintiff’s representative, issued a promissory note of KRW 40,000,000 to Defendant C, one of the joint issuers of the Plaintiff, and the due date is at sight, and a notary public accepting compulsory execution based on the aforesaid promissory note on the same day prepared by E-joint Office No. 554 (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) in addition to the notarial deed as to KRW 200,000,00,000.

[Grounds for recognition] The written evidence Nos. 3, 5, and 6 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On July 5, 2016, Plaintiff F completed Plaintiff F’s registration of dismissal and appointment of office director H and G, with a forged Plaintiff’s list of shareholders, written resolution in lieu of the general meeting of shareholders, etc.

Since each of the notarial deeds in this case is invalid since it is written by F, other than the representative of the plaintiff, compulsory execution based on this case shall not be permitted.

B. The Defendants F, as a de facto shareholder of the Plaintiff, cancel the title trust of shares.