1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant A Co., Ltd.: 37,549,420 won and 8,250,271 won among them, from May 6, 2004; 26.

1. Claim against Defendant A and Defendant C

A. The facts in the separate sheet Nos. 1, 2, and 3 do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings, the above Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the money stated in the order to the Plaintiff.

B. On December 1, 2008, the Defendants were dissolved pursuant to Article 520-2(1) of the Commercial Act in the case of Defendant A, and completed the registration of dissolution, and the registration was closed upon completion of liquidation pursuant to Article 520-2(4) of the Commercial Act on December 1, 201, and Defendant C Co., Ltd was dissolved pursuant to Article 520-2(1) of the Commercial Act on December 2, 2007, and completed the registration of dissolution, and the registration was closed upon completion of liquidation pursuant to Article 520-2(4) of the Commercial Act on December 3, 2010. Thus, the Defendants cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s request. However, even if a stock company is dissolved pursuant to Article 520-2 of the Commercial Act and its liquidation is deemed to have been completed, if any legal relationship remains, and it is not completely extinguished (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da6707, May 27, 1994).

(In addition, even if D, the representative liquidator of the above Defendants, was declared bankrupt and granted immunity, the Plaintiff’s claim against the above Defendants, a separate legal entity, does not interfere with any other claims of this case).

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;

(b) Applicable provisions of Acts: Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act;

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.