2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. By October 4, 2013, the Plaintiff confirmed that the loan principal paid to D was KRW 230,000,000, and the interest accrued up to that time is KRW 30,000,000,000, the Plaintiff drafted a loan memorandum with the debtor as the Defendants (hereinafter “the loan memorandum”).

B. On October 7, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on October 4, 2013 with respect to D and the shares of the Defendants, among E forest land E 95,646 square meters (hereinafter in this case, forest land) in Innju, pursuant to the loan memorandum in this case.

C. The Defendants filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking confirmation of the existence of an obligation against the Plaintiff that the guaranteed obligation against D under the loan rejection of this case does not exist, but lost the said judgment, which became final and conclusive on August 12, 2016 (hereinafter “prior judgment”).

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff guaranteed F’s interest on the principal and interest of the obligation under the instant loan memorandum against F. Since the judgment of the preceding Defendants became final and conclusive against the Defendants, the Defendants jointly pay the Plaintiff the principal and interest of the remainder of the obligation that the Plaintiff did not receive from the obligor, as well as damages for delay.

B. The existence of the guarantor's intent to guarantee is a matter of interpretation of the intent of the party and fact-finding to be determined by comprehensively considering the motive and background of the party involved in the transaction, the form and content of the involvement, the purpose to be achieved by the transaction, the transaction practices, etc. However, since the guarantee is made in special circumstances where the party bears it, the existence of the guarantor's intent to guarantee should be recognized by strictly restricting it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da2566, May 30, 200), joint and several guarantee contracts and water guarantee contracts have legal characteristics.

(b).