1. The Defendants together with the Plaintiff amounting to KRW 15,00,000 and the period from December 4, 2013 to the full payment.

1. The following facts may be acknowledged as either a dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 1.

On July 2, 2013, the Defendants issued and delivered to the Plaintiff a promissory note with a face value of KRW 50 million and due date September 10, 2013, and the place of payment and payment, and a promissory note with the Plaintiff as Seoul and the payee (hereinafter “instant promissory note”).

B. The Defendants paid only part of the Promissory Notes to the Plaintiff, and did not pay the remainder KRW 15 million.

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to the Defendants’ aforementioned recognition of the payment obligation of the Promissory Notes, the Defendants, the joint issuers of the Promissory Notes, jointly with the Plaintiff, are liable to pay 15 million won, the unpaid promissory Notes, and to pay damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum from December 4, 2013 to the date of full payment following the delivery of the payment order of the instant case, to the Plaintiff.

B. As to the Defendants’ assertion and its determination, the Defendants asserted to the effect that the preparation date and the publication date of the Promissory Notes in this case are different from the fact (the actual date was issued in Busan on September 2, 2013), and the Plaintiff did not make a payment of the Promissory Notes at the due date, and that the Plaintiff did not confirm whether the Plaintiff invested in the Defendants through Han Enterprise Co., Ltd., and thus, the Plaintiff cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s claim.

However, as long as the Defendants issued the Promissory Notes, they should bear the responsibility as stated in the Promissory Notes in this case, and when claiming the payment of the Promissory Notes against the issuer, the payment deadline is not required, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that there is no relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendants with respect to the receipt of the Promissory Notes in this case. Accordingly, the above assertion by the Defendants is all concerned.