1. Defendant G and Defendant C jointly share KRW 30,000,000 and their amount from April 5, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff’s assertion against Defendant B on April 1, 2016 lent KRW 30,00,000 to Defendant G for six months as interest rate of 5%. Defendant B, an operator, used the legal personality as a means to avoid the application of the Act, and thus, Defendant B, jointly with Defendant G, is liable to pay damages for delay calculated at the above KRW 30,000,000 as well as at the rate of 24% per annum under the Interest Limitation Act.

Judgment

However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone cannot be accepted as the Plaintiff’s above assertion because it is difficult to recognize that Defendant G and C were used as a legal person of Defendant B with the intent to evade obligations.

The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is dismissed for reasons.

The reasons for the claim against the defendant C are as shown in attached Form 2.

The gist of the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant D under Articles 208(3)2 and 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act of the judgment of deemed confession is that the above sales contract constitutes a fraudulent act, and thus, the above sales contract is revoked and seek compensation for the equivalent value by cancelling the contract, as it is concluded on June 30, 2016.

Judgment

As examined in Paragraph 1, that the existence of a claim against Defendant B, which the Plaintiff asserted as a preserved claim for revocation of a fraudulent act, is not recognized, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is rejected.

Around December 16, 2016, Defendant B, a summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion of the claim against Defendant E, provides the third real estate as a payment in lieu of the debt of Defendant B (former J Co., Ltd.) with the third real estate at the time of insolvency where the third real estate, including the debt owed to the Plaintiff, exceeds the active property.