1. Defendant D and E jointly and severally with the Plaintiff KRW 50,000,000, and Defendant D with respect thereto from April 19, 2018, and Defendant E.

1. Claim against Defendant D and E

(a) On December 15, 2010, the indication of the claim, refund of KRW 50 million, which was acquired by deceit as a security deposit for construction works;

(b) Defendant D: Judgment by means of confession (Article 208 (3) 2, and Article 150 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act). Defendant E: Judgment by means of service by publication (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Claim against the defendant limited liability company B

A. Basic facts 1) The Plaintiff is the Defendant Limited Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) on December 2010.

) In entering into a subcontract construction contract with the F Model License, the Plaintiff agreed that “the Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant Company KRW 50 million in cash at the time of entering into this contract” (hereinafter referred to as “instant agreement”)

(2) At the time of the above agreement, Defendant D was registered as an internal director of the Defendant Company at the time of the above agreement, and affixed the seal on the guarantor column of the above subcontract. (2) On December 15, 2010, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 50 million to Defendant D.

Defendant D, on the same day, prepared a loan certificate to the Plaintiff to the effect that “the Plaintiff received KRW 50 million as a security deposit for construction works related to the F Model Work,” and Defendant E sealed it as a guarantor.

3) The Plaintiff failed to perform the test of the F Model Hashes. [The grounds for recognition are without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 3 through No. 5], and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion made the instant agreement with the Defendant Company to conclude the construction contract on the model of the F New Construction Work by Defendant D and E.

Defendant D and E acquired a construction deposit of KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff with a copy of a construction brokerage, and the Defendant Company actively participated in the act of defraudation by Defendant D and E, such as concluding the instant agreement with the Plaintiff and issuing a certificate of the seal impression of the corporation in the process. As such, the Defendant Company was jointly and severally with Defendant D and E about 50 million in the name of the construction deposit.