1. Defendant C Co., Ltd. shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 240,000,000 and the interest rate thereon from October 5, 2008 to the day of full payment.

1. A primary fact-based primary loan certificate No. 1 (No. 1-1): The Plaintiff and the debtor: The principal of the loan borrowed by Defendant B: The due date for payment of KRW 300,000,000: October 1, 2009: A person who borrowed the loan above 2% per month: Defendant B (Defendant B) representing the Defendant Company;

A. D, August 28, 2008, in the name of Defendant B, an ASEAN, drafted a loan certificate with the following content to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as “the first loan certificate”). The second loan certificate (No. 1-2) shall be 240,000,000 monthly in two copies, and the debtor shall borrow as of September 5, 2008: (a) the representative of the defendant company B (the defendant company) the director E (E) individual E (E).

B. On September 5, 2008, D prepared a loan certificate with the following contents to the Plaintiff in the name of the Defendant Company where Defendant B was the representative director.

(hereinafter referred to as “the second loan certificate”). (c)

On September 5, 2008, Defendant B ratified the second loan certificate on behalf of the Defendant Company. On September 5, 2008, Defendant B entered into a mortgage agreement with the Plaintiff, and with respect to F forest No. 5,094 square meters in Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, the Defendant Company: (a) the maximum debt amount of 700,000,000 square meters; (b) the creditor and the mortgagee; (c) the Plaintiff; and (d) the Defendant Company, both the obligor and the obligor; (d) on the same day, the establishment registration of mortgage was

[Based on the recognition] Defendant B: A without dispute, Defendant B made a forgery of the evidence No. 1-1 (the first loan certificate) and the fact that D without authority is to prepare the first loan certificate under Defendant B’s name without authority is without dispute between the parties, and the following:

3.2

For the same reasons as stated in the Paragraph, Defendant B cannot be deemed to have ratified the above acts of Defendant B. Thus, the first loan certificate has no effect on Defendant B.

Defendant B’s above defense of evidence is justified.

(A) Each statement, including the number of branch numbers, and the purport of the entire argument: Defendant Company: Confession (Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. The defendant company.