A. On May 26, 2017, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 50 million to Defendant B by setting the interest rate of KRW 3% per month and on May 26, 2018. In such case, Defendant C guaranteed the Defendant B’s above obligation, and thus, the Defendants jointly and severally pay the Plaintiff KRW 50 million and interest or delay damages.

B. The evidence Nos. 1 and 1 (a tea certificate) of Defendant B is based on the seal of the above Defendant; however, there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that Defendant C had the seal of Defendant B with regard to the real estate in the name of Defendant B. It is insufficient to view that Defendant C had the authority to affix the seal on behalf of the Defendant B, and unless there is any other evidence to acknowledge it, it cannot be used as evidence, and there is no other evidence to support the fact that the Plaintiff lent KRW 50 million to Defendant B. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

[Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendant B is responsible for the expression agent, but it is difficult to view that Defendant C is responsible for the existence of basic power of representation or the expression agent under the Civil Act premised on such external appearance, solely on the fact that Defendant C was a child of Defendant B, and was in possession of a certified copy of the real estate register in Defendant B’s name. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit). 2. Determination as to Defendant C

A. The Plaintiff, around May 26, 2017, lent 50 million won interest rate of 3% per month to Defendant C who represented Defendant B, and on May 26, 2018, the due date for payment was determined and extended to May 26, 2018. As Defendant C guaranteed the above obligation, Defendant C is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff interest and delay damages calculated at the interest rate of 50 million won and 3% per month from May 26, 2017 to the date of full payment.

(b) Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act, which provides a judgment based on the deeming of confession.