1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the Plaintiff’s primary claim against the Defendants is dismissed.

2.(a)

Co., Ltd.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s claim and provisional attachment 1 against C Co., Ltd.) The Plaintiff Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”)

(2) On April 21, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a credit transaction agreement with each credit limit amounting to KRW 90 million as of April 21, 2006, KRW 50 million on June 21, 2007, KRW 190 million on November 6, 2007, KRW 300 million on June 30, 2009, and KRW 6 million on December 16, 201, and the Plaintiff has a credit transaction claim amounting to KRW 992 million on the aggregate based on each of the credit transaction agreements as of March 21, 201 to April 2, 201. (2) The Plaintiff confirmed the aggravation of the financial status of KRW 30 million on November 22, 2011, designating a company as a “corporate subject to restructuring” as a “corporate subject to management.

3) On July 25, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) as Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2012Kadan4860, the claim claim amounting to KRW 550 million among the above loan claims amounting to KRW 50,000,000; and (b) Haddi Co., Ltd., Ltd., a garnishee of the obligor C (hereinafter “Haddi”)

(B) A provisional attachment of KRW 250 million among the claim for the purchase price of goods against Defendant A (Seoul Northern District Court 2012Kadan4860). B. C’s issuance of the notarial deed of the First Promissory Notes against Defendant A is a Promissory Notes with the face value of KRW 470 million for Defendant A in excess of the debt amount on February 15, 2012 (hereinafter “The First Promissory Notes”).

(B) If the payment of the said Promissory Notes is delayed, a notarial deed by which no objection is raised even if compulsory execution is being effected (No. 18, 2012, No. 18, 2012, hereinafter referred to as a notarial deed by a notary public).

C. On March 6, 2012, Defendant A issued a seizure and collection order against Defendant A with respect to the claim amount as the title of execution of the No. 1 Promissory Notes as the No. 1 Promissory Notes No. 100 million won (Seoul Northern District Court 2010, 3664). The Defendant A received a seizure and collection order against the third obligor C’s claim for the price of goods against the obligor C’s third obligor Hadidi (Seoul Northern District Court 2012 Tadi3664).

C Issuance of the Fair Promissory Notes No. 2 against Defendant B, in March 15, 2012, to Defendant B.