1. The Defendants received on July 20, 2004 from the Suwon District Court in relation to the real estate stated in the attached list to C.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 13, 2005, the Plaintiff received credit card payment claims from the credit card company to Nonparty C, and then filed an application with the Chuncheon District Court for a payment order on October 2, 2007 for a credit card payment order against Nonparty C. The payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) was issued on September 24, 2007, stating that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff 9,643,647 won and 4,783,582 won with interest of 17% per annum from September 24, 2007 to the date of full payment.” The above order was finalized on October 23, 2007.

B. The Plaintiff’s claim amount based on the instant payment order against C is KRW 15,808,440 as of April 20, 2015 (= Principal KRW 4,783,582, interest KRW 11,024,858).

C. On July 20, 2004, C completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) on July 19, 2004 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) as one’s own ownership on July 20, 204.

C There is no particular property other than the instant real property.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including additional numbers), the inquiry reply to the court's inquire of the case at hand, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. In a case where the obligee’s right to the obligor, which is to be preserved by subrogation, is a monetary claim in the event that the obligee’s right to the obligor is a monetary claim in subrogation of the obligor, that is, the obligee may exercise the obligee’s right to the third obligor on behalf of the obligor only when the obligor is insolvent. The insolvent as a requirement for subrogation of the obligee means that the obligor is not capable of paying the obligor. In particular, in a case where the obligor cannot expect voluntary repayment, the repayment through compulsory execution should be considered. Therefore, the important consideration is to determine whether the obligor is a small property or active property, or a property

must be a lawsuit.

Therefore, it is true.