1. The Defendants jointly combine the Plaintiff with KRW 84 million, and Defendant E Co., Ltd from September 9, 2017, as to the amount of KRW 84 million.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant C Co., Ltd (hereinafter “C”) issued to F the electronic bill (hereinafter “instant bill”) as of May 15, 2017, KRW 84 million, and the due date, September 8, 2017, as of September 8, 2017.

B. The Promissory Notes (hereinafter “D”), G, Defendant E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), and the Plaintiff were endorsed and transferred from Defendant F Co., Ltd., the addressee, in turn.

C. The bill of this case was presented at the date of payment but was refused to pay.

The Plaintiff is holding the Promissory Notes.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, Defendant C is the issuer of the Promissory Notes, as Defendant D and E are the endorser, and thus, Defendant D and E are obligated to pay the amount of the Promissory Notes and its delayed damages jointly with the Plaintiff as the holder.

B. As to the Defendants’ assertion, Defendant C asserts that, on April 6, 2017, Defendant C issued the instant bill without the consent of the representative director, Defendant C issued the instant bill without the consent of the representative director.

However, there is no evidence to support the claim.

Defendant C’s defense is without merit.

(2) Defendant D (A) asserted that the bill of this case was endorsed and transferred to G for the payment of the construction cost.

After the issuance of the Promissory Notes was refused, Defendant D paid the price directly to G.

The obligation to repay the bill of this case lies in G.

(B) The circumstance alleged by Defendant D’s assertion is only related to the underlying relationship in which the instant bill was transferred to G, and does not extinguish the Plaintiff’s right under the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act separated therefrom.

Defendant D’s assertion is without merit.

C. On September 9, 2017, the Defendants jointly delivered the instant complaint to the Plaintiff from September 9, 2017, which is the day following the due date.