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

A. On November 20, 2006, the Plaintiff sold in KRW 242,50,000 the land for gas station in Yongcheon-si and KRW 1,480 square meters and above ground and KRW 878 square meters in D, and the ownership transfer registration was completed in the Defendant’s future.

B. On December 22, 2006, the Defendant borrowed KRW 150 million from 0,000,000 from Madern community credit cooperatives, with the interest rate fluctuation rate (based on the rate of 7.3% per annum, 0.5% per annum), 17% per annum, and due date of repayment as of December 22, 2009, and the Plaintiff guaranteed the Defendant’s obligation to pay the above borrowed money on the same day.

C. Around June 2007, the Defendant did not pay interest on the above borrowed money, and around June 2007, the 5-dong community credit cooperatives, which filed an application for voluntary auction with the Daegu District Court E as to the real estate owned by the Defendant (1,480 square meters of land for gas stations in Yongcheon-si, and 878 square meters of land before D), and received dividends of KRW 139,232,572 on March 139, 2009 during the said voluntary auction procedure.

On March 10, 2009, the Plaintiff, a joint and several surety, paid the remainder of 62,226,438 won to community credit cooperatives.

E. Meanwhile, from July 30, 2002 to July 13, 2009, the Plaintiff engaged in petroleum retail business with the trade name “F”, and the Defendant operated a gas station with the trade name “G” from December 18, 2006 to October 19, 2007.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence No. 1, the result of an order to submit taxation information to the director of the North Daegu District Tax Office, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the indemnity amount of KRW 62,226,438 and delay damages, unless there are special circumstances.

In regard to this, the defendant defenses that the claim for indemnity of this case was extinguished by the commercial prescription, and therefore, the above loan contract with the defendant of 5-dong community credit cooperatives, and the above joint and several guarantee contract with the plaintiff all constitute commercial activities, and the claim for indemnity of this case was based on the above contract. As seen earlier, the plaintiff and the defendant are both merchants, and they are the parties to indemnity.