1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 33,405,00 and 5% per annum from January 16, 2018 to June 14, 2019.

1. Chief;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) around May 8, 2017, the Plaintiff is Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”).

(ii) electric scooter and related parts (hereinafter referred to as scooter, etc.) from scooter.

(2) The Defendant C agreed with the Defendant Company to jointly and severally perform the obligation to return the purchase price at the time that the supply of the foregoing scooters and the supply of the above scooters, etc. is not made, as a person who actually runs the Defendant Company, and thereby, wired KRW 50,00,000 to the Defendant Company’s account as the representative director of the Defendant Company.

3) However, since the Defendants did not supply only ten of the total sales price of the Jeju-do total sales price (1,000,000 won per 1,000,000 won per unit) and did not supply the remaining goods, the Defendants sought payment of KRW 40,00,000,000 from the purchase price. (B) The Plaintiff and the Defendant Company entered into an oral contract with the Jeju-do total sales price of the Jeju-do total sales price of the Jeju-do total sales price of around early May 2017, and the Plaintiff remitted KRW 50,00,000 out of the total sales price of the Jeju-do total sales price of KRW 100,000 to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant Company issued an electronic tax invoice of KRW 50,000,000.

2) After the conclusion of the above total sales contract, the Defendant Company delivered goods, such as electric scooters, to the place required by Nonparty F, the representative director E, the Plaintiff’s company. 3) The Plaintiff terminated the light sales contract on September 2017, and demanded the Defendant Company to refund the money calculated by deducting the goods already supplied from the down payment amount of KRW 50,000,00,000, when the remainder of the total sales price under the above total sales contract was paid.

However, around October 2017, the Defendant Company agreed to settle accounts by additional supply of the goods of the Defendant Company instead of returning the total sales price to the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company, due to financial difficulties.

4 Under the above settlement agreement, the Defendant Company supplied the Plaintiff with goods such as electric scooters, etc., and the Defendant Company entered into the total sales contract.