1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff No. 25 of the 2012 deed prepared by C on November 9, 2012 by the law firm C.

1. On November 9, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) borrowed KRW 100 million from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan”); (b) made and issued a notarial deed under a monetary loan agreement (No. 25, 2012, a notary public drafted by a law firm C; hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) with the content that the loan amounting to KRW 100 million and maturity on December 9, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, since all of the instant loans were repaid to the Defendant, compulsory execution based on the instant authentic deed should not be allowed.

B. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in each statement in subparagraph 1-1 through 18, the fact that the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the sum of KRW 5,200,000,000 as indicated below [Attachment 1] from December 20, 2012 to July 25, 2013 is recognized.

Further to the above 12012-120,00 4,00 20 2012-128,2000 3201-01-04 8000 42013-01-007 1,950 6203-01-07 00 201-1, 000 205 201-1,000 203-1, 201-1, 000 205, 201-1, 2005 20, 301-1, 200, 300, 200, 200-1, 201-20, 305, 201-1, 005, 200, 200, 2005, 200-1,000