1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 3, 2014, Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C Co., Ltd”) filed a claim against the Plaintiff A Co., Ltd. for the payment of the purchase price of the goods, and issued a payment order with the Seoul Central District Court 2014 tea25956 on June 3, 2014 that the Plaintiff would pay to the Defendant an amount of KRW 138,000,000 per annum from December 1, 2013 to the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order, and KRW 6% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment. The above payment order became final and conclusive around that time.

(hereinafter “instant payment order”). B.

On April 7, 2016, the Plaintiff Company and the Defendant Company agreed to the following terms for the repayment of the unpaid amount of goods:

(hereinafter referred to as “instant implementation agreement”). A C A C A C

C. According to the instant implementation agreement, the Plaintiff Company paid all KRW 100 million to the Defendant Company by May 26, 2016.

Around September to October, 2016, the Defendant Company applied for compulsory execution based on the instant payment order, and issued a seizure and collection order to the Plaintiff Company’s goods price claim and E Bank deposit claims (U.S. District Court Order 2016TTTTT 5014 and 2016TT 5234), and the seizure execution (F) was conducted to the corporeal movables owned by the Plaintiff Company.

(hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant compulsory execution”). (e)

On October 21, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of objection against the Defendant Company seeking the refusal of execution based on the instant payment order (Seoul Central District Court 2016Da126683). In the instant lawsuit, the Defendant Company terminated the instant performance agreement on the grounds that the Plaintiff Company did not order the raw materials as promised in the instant performance order. The Plaintiff Company asserted that the claim based on the instant payment order remains KRW 97,446,148 out of the principal amount when the Plaintiff Company appropriated KRW 100 million paid in the order of expenses, interest, and principal amount.

However, the above court deemed that the instant performance agreement was terminated on August 16, 2017.