1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 107,370,000 to the Plaintiff and Defendant B with respect thereto from March 26, 2016, and Defendant C.

The plaintiff operated a foreign tourist tourr called D, and the defendant B served as the director in charge of Hanba Co., Ltd.

One project operator has received hotel reservations from overseas travels in advance and subsequently settled them, and Defendant B received the settlement amount to be returned to one project operator as an individual account and embezzled part of the amount.

On April 9, 2009, Defendant B prepared a note of payment that the payment amounting to KRW 107,370,000 shall be paid to D, and the Defendant C, the wife of Defendant B, signed it as the guarantor.

The grounds for recognition of the above facts: The defendants are jointly obligated to pay to the plaintiff the agreed amount of KRW 107,370,000 and delay damages for the agreed amount of KRW 107,370,00, according to the facts without any dispute, Gap 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

The defendants asserted that the above payment rejection was made by coercion of the plaintiff et al. and thus is invalid, but they do not accept the above assertion on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

Although the Defendants asserted that the amount of damages of the Plaintiff due to the embezzlement by Defendant B should be proved, the Plaintiff’s damages due to embezzlement are merely the premise of the payment agreement of KRW 107,370,000, and the amount of damages need not be fully proved.

Although the Defendants asserted that Defendant B’s embezzlement is not a victim and a creditor in the form of payment, they do not accept the above assertion since the operator of D and the person who received the form of payment ought to be the Plaintiff as recognized earlier.