1. The Defendant: (a) from October 29, 2015, the Plaintiff KRW 2,641,322 to Plaintiff B, Plaintiff C, D, and E respectively; and (b) from October 29, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant was established on May 19, 2009 for the purpose of civil engineering work, etc.

B. On March 19, 2013, the deceased G (hereinafter “the deceased”) was admitted to the Defendant and was appointed as the Defendant’s inside director on June 12, 2013, but on March 27, 2015, the execution of duties was suspended upon the Ulsan District Court 2015Kahap7’s decision to suspend the execution of duties.

C. On March 28, 2016, the Deceased died, and the Plaintiffs inherited the deceased’s property.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, purport of whole pleading

2. Determination

A. 1) The Plaintiffs asserted that the deceased joined the Defendant on March 19, 2013 and worked until June 15, 2015. During that period, upon the request of H, the representative director of the Defendant, leased KRW 70,092,00 to the deceased a total of KRW 10,425,00,00 for retirement allowances, KRW 10,514,075 for retirement allowances, KRW 19,902,340 for performance-based settlement refund, KRW 19,843,860 for bonus, KRW 34,353,945 for performance, and KRW 34,353,945 for the deceased. 2) The Defendant’s assertion that the deceased would have paid KRW 70,00,000 for the Plaintiff’s total amount of loans to H and the Defendant’s financial account, including KRW 261,794,750,000,000 for the Plaintiff.

Therefore, since the defendant's obligation to the deceased was fully repaid, the plaintiffs' claim of this case should not be accepted.

B. According to the overall purport of the evidence Nos. 6 and 10 of the judgment as to the claim for the loan No. 1, the Defendant’s representative director was in a state of suspension of duty since Jun. 19, 2013 according to the Ulsan District Court Decision No. 2013Kahap256, and the Deceased was actually operating the Defendant from around that time, and the Deceased was the Defendant.