1. Defendant C and D jointly combines the Plaintiffs with KRW 200,000,000, and Defendant C from May 13, 2012, respectively.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1 regarding the claim for promissory notes against defendant C and D, the defendant C and D issued, on March 12, 2012, a promissory note with a face value of KRW 200 million, the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs, the issue date, May 12, 2012, the due date of the payment date of the issuance date, and the due date of the payment date of the issuance date, and the payment date of the said promissory note to the above defendants at the payment date of the above payment date (hereinafter "the Promissory note in this case"). The plaintiffs can be recognized as having presented the payment date of the said promissory note to the above defendants. Under the above facts, the defendant C and D jointly have the obligation to pay the plaintiffs a face value of KRW 200 million,000,000,0000,0000,0000,0000 per annum from May 13, 2012, respectively, to the day immediately following the delivery date of the bill in this case.

As to this, Defendant C and D asserted that, on January 17, 2012, Defendant C and D issued the Promissory Notes in return for the cancellation of the above provisional disposition, Defendant C and D issued the said Promissory Notes in return for the cancellation of the above provisional disposition. Thus, Defendant C and the said Defendants merely issued the said Promissory Notes in mistake, even though they did not have any bonds and liability relationship between the Plaintiffs and the said Defendants, the said Defendants’ act of issuing the said Promissory Notes was erroneous and thus cancelled.

However, there is no evidence to prove that the issuing act of the above promissory note was an act caused by mistake, and the above defendants' above assertion is without merit.

2. Determination as to the revocation of fraudulent act against the defendant company and the claim for restitution

A. The facts of recognition 1) F and Defendant C are based on the development of the superior industry on June 29, 201 (hereinafter “the superior industry development”).