(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;

(Provided, That Defendant B provided joint and several sureties within the limit of 325,000,000).

Grounds for Recognition: Article 208(3)2 and Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act (Ruling as to deemed confessions, respectively)

2. Claim against Defendant C

A. There is no dispute between the parties to the determination of the cause of the claim, or comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, since the bank extended KRW 300 million to the defendant A under the joint and several guarantee of defendant C on May 8, 1996 and repaid KRW 10 million, and extended the maturity of the remaining loans on May 8, 1998, the bank extended the maturity of the remaining loans to the limited liability company specialized in Korean financial system (hereinafter referred to as "Korean finance"), Korean finance to the mutual savings bank (hereinafter referred to as "promotion savings"), the promotion savings transferred the above loan claims to the plaintiff in sequential order. As of October 12, 2016, the above principal and interest of the loan as of October 12, 200,217, 207 (the principal and interest of the loan principal of KRW 23,786, 544, 176, 4363) can be recognized as the principal and interest of the plaintiff as joint and several surety.

B. Defendant C’s assertion of extinctive prescription and Defendant C’s assertion that the foregoing loan claim expired by prescription.

In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement in Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, our finance may recognize the fact that the defendant C et al. filed a lawsuit against the defendant C et al. on the loan claim against the Seoul Central District Court 2003Da46497, which succeeded to the above lawsuit by acquiring the above loan claim, the promotion savings during the lawsuit pending has succeeded to the above lawsuit, and the above court rendered a favorable judgment on July 3, 2003, and the above judgment becomes final and conclusive on August 5, 2003.

However, the fact that the instant lawsuit was filed on October 31, 2016 after the lapse of ten years from the date of the above judgment is recorded.