The Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd shall pay 20 million won by September 7, 2017, and confirm that it will pay 20 million won by September 30, 2017, and will be legally liable if it will take this day on this day. The interest for arrears shall be paid separately.

According to the fact of recognition as D’s guarantor B, which is a borrower, on September 4, 2017, the defendant is obligated to pay as the guarantor of the loan certificate of this case the amount of KRW 40 million and the damages for delay at each rate of 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act from October 1, 2017 to April 6, 2018, which is obvious from the date following the date when the original copy of the loan of this case was delivered to the defendant, as the plaintiff, as the guarantor of the loan of this case, to the date when the original copy of the payment order of this case was delivered to the defendant, and from the next day to the date of full payment.

2. The defendant's assertion, etc. argues that he is an employee of C who is the principal debtor, and that the plaintiff has a big interest in finding the office and having his house, and that he has no choice but to guarantee the loan certificate of this case and should be held responsible first for C who is the principal debtor.

First of all, there is no evidence to prove that the defendant prepared the loan certificate of this case by coercion, intimidation, etc. by the plaintiff, and the defendant's argument about the validity of the loan certificate of this case is

Next, in the case of the highest search defense as the surety, the surety must prove that the obligee has the ability to repay and that it should be easy to execute it.