1. Defendant C, D, and E jointly share the Plaintiff KRW 125,907,945 and their related thereto on May 10, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the party is a company with the objective of film production, distribution, and import business (as of September 1, 2015, the trade name of the company F was changed as at the present time through “Co., Ltd. B”; hereinafter the entire “Plaintiff”), Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”), and Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant D”) are companies with the objective of film production investment business, etc., and Defendant ISU- Global Contents Investment Association (hereinafter “Defendant Association”) is a small and medium enterprise establishment investment association established under the Support for Small and Medium Enterprise Establishment Act with the completion of the business as its executive partner.

Defendant E was the real representative of Defendant D and was the representative of Defendant C on December 1, 2014.

B. The Plaintiff and Defendant D and Defendant Association entered into each planning and development investment contract (i) and Defendant E are film “G” (hereinafter “instant film”) produced by the Plaintiff around April 2014 through May 2014.

(2) On June 2, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a planning and development investment agreement with Defendant D (hereinafter “instant 1 investment agreement”) with respect to the production investment agreement.

A) Accordingly, on June 20, 2014, Defendant D paid KRW 100,000,000 for planning and development costs to the Plaintiff. Article 2 (Development Costs) (5) The Plaintiff must complete scenario work at the development cost paid by Defendant D. However, the scenario completion refers to the agreement between Defendant D and the Plaintiff as a photographer. (9) Development cost is calculated by including the scenario of this case’s film in the net production cost if the scenario of this case’s film is actually produced as a film. (10) Development cost is calculated by adding it to the film’s net production cost if the scenario of this case’s film is actually produced as a film. (5) No agreement was reached between Defendant D and the Plaintiff on important matters related to the production of the film, such as the scenario, supervisory selection, distribution, production cost, etc., the scenario completed by the Plaintiff as a film.