1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant A’s KRW 66,659,004 and for this, KRW 12% per annum from December 18, 2013 to September 17, 2015; and

1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;

2. Grounds for recognizing a claim against Defendant B: Judgment by service (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act).

3. Claim against the defendant A;

A. According to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, the facts constituting the grounds for the attachment can be acknowledged. Thus, the defendant A is obligated to pay the money stated in the purport of the claim.

B. Defendant A asserts to the effect that, through an application for resumption of pleading, only lent the name to accomplices, and is not responsible due to intimidation and assault of accomplices, and that he cannot repay money that he did not use.

However, even if the above defendant is assumed to have committed the above tort due to intimidation and assault by accomplices, unless there is any evidence to acknowledge that this was forced to resist, the above defendant cannot avoid liability for tort.

In addition, even though the degree of liability of one tortfeasor is minor compared to other tortfeasors, the scope of liability of the tortfeasor cannot be limited as part of the amount of compensation for damages in relation to the victim.

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da31691 delivered on October 20, 1998). Ultimately, the above defendant's assertion cannot be accepted.

4. Conclusion of the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants