1. It is confirmed that each of the resolutions listed in the separate sheet issued by the Defendant at the temporary shareholders’ meeting on July 17, 2013 do not exist.

1. The facts falling under any of the following subparagraphs of basic facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged by taking into account Gap evidence 3 to 5 (including each number, if any, hereinafter the same shall apply), evidence 7, evidence 10 to 13, evidence 17, and evidence 18, evidence 2 to 8, and the whole purport of arguments and arguments.

The defendant is an enterprise running route passenger transport business in the old and American region, the plaintiffs are those who have acquired the shares of the defendant company from D and E, and the plaintiff A is the representative director from February 11, 2008 to January 6, 201, the defendant's director from February 11, 2008 to February 111, 201, the plaintiff B is the defendant's director from February 11, 2008 to February 11, 201, and the plaintiff B is the defendant's director from February 11, 2008 to February 11, 201.

B. The Defendant’s list of shareholders from February 11, 2008 to February 20, 2012 is as follows:

The number of shares held by plaintiffs A 16,184 40.46% D 15,600 39.00% of plaintiffs B 4,216 10.54% E 4,000 10.00%

C. After the joint acceptance of the Defendant’s shares, the Plaintiffs and D continued dispute over the distribution of profits arising from the Defendant Company and the embezzlement of Plaintiff A’s funds.

Accordingly, the Plaintiffs resigned from the Defendant’s position as an executive officer by transferring the management rights of the Defendant Company to D (on January 6, 201, G, who was the Defendant’s representative director), and on March 18, 2011, concluded a share acquisition agreement between D and D with respect to the transfer of all of the Defendant’s shares (Plaintiff A16,184, Plaintiff B4, B4,216, total 20,40 shares) owned by the Plaintiffs to D, but as the conflict between both sides continued, the obligation under the said agreement was not fulfilled.

On the other hand, on October 30, 2009, the Plaintiff A borrowed KRW 550 million from the Osung Mutual Savings Bank, which was working as the representative director of the Defendant Company, and 20,400 shares owned by the Plaintiffs.