1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant A, C, D, and E’s joint and several KRW 154,99,450 and their 35,159,688;

B. Defendant B.

1. The facts constituting the grounds for the judgment of the claim against Defendant A, C, D, and E (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant A, etc.”) are either not in dispute with the Plaintiff and the Defendant, etc., or may be recognized by the purport of the entire pleadings and the arguments.

Therefore, Defendant A, etc. is obligated to pay the same money as the Plaintiff’s Paragraph (1) of the Disposition No. 1.

2. The following facts regarding the determination of claims against Defendant B, F, and G are acknowledged by the parties or by the purport of the entire pleadings, either Party A1 to 6, B1, and the entire arguments:

In other words, on January 5, 2006, the judgment of the plaintiff was rendered in favor of all of the plaintiff in the claim amount No. 2005da48891 against the plaintiff's deceased H(Death on May 30, 2013) and the judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

Defendant B, F, and G, who are the children of the network H due to the death of the network H, succeed to each one-third share, and thus, Defendant B, F, and G are obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of money as stated in Section 1(b) of the Disposition.

However, although Defendant B, F, and G filed a request for a special inheritance approval with the Busan Family Court Decision 2016Ra1224, Defendant B’s appeal was dismissed, and Defendant F and G’s report on qualified acceptance was accepted.

Therefore, Defendant B, F, and G, the heir of the network H, are obligated to pay the same amount of money as indicated in Section 2(b) of the Disposition. However, as Defendant F and G’s inheritance limited approval request was accepted, the Plaintiff is only entitled to compulsory execution based on Defendant F and G’s claim against Defendant F and G only on the property inherited from Defendant F and G H.

On the other hand, there is no particular limitation on the plaintiff's compulsory execution against the defendant B, since the defendant B's request for a special inheritance approval was dismissed.

3. The Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants is accepted in entirety. Compulsory execution based on the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant F and G is limited as seen earlier.