1. It was concluded on October 21, 2013 with respect to the claims listed in the separate sheet No. 1 between Defendant B and Defendant D.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s debt 1 against D Co., Ltd.) The Plaintiff produced the electronic parts metal type and made D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”).

(2) On June 30, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D claiming the payment of unpaid goods ( Daegu District Court Decision 2013Gahap2392). On March 14, 2014, the above court rendered a final judgment that “D shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 135,750,000 and KRW 20% interest per annum from January 16, 2014 to the date of full payment, excluding KRW 60,000,000 paid with promissorysory notes, and KRW 50,000,000,000 delivered around August 2013, 2013, and the above court held that “D shall pay to the Plaintiff 135,750,000 won with the interest of KRW 20% per annum from January 16, 2014.”

B. Defendant B’s acquisition of Defendant B’s claim (hereinafter “Defendant B”), as an employee of D’s representative director E, took out a loan of KRW 80 million on January 10, 2013, and remitted it to D on January 14, 2013. From D on February 1, 2013, Defendant B promised to set the due date for payment and pay interest at 10% per annum on February 28, 2013 after the due date for payment. If Defendant B fails to comply or is unable to perform this, Defendant B was issued a performance undertaking to transfer D’s sales claim corresponding to the principal and interest if it did not repay the above amount to Defendant B, and the transfer and acquisition of the obligation to Defendant B should have been recorded as “new obligation transfer and acquisition” (hereinafter “new obligation transfer and acquisition obligation”) and “Defendant B’s new obligation transfer and acquisition” (hereinafter “new obligation transfer and acquisition obligation”).

3 Korea Earthpton shall be supported by Daegu District Court Kimcheon on the grounds that assignment of claims and provisional seizure of claims are concurrent.