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

A. A. Around June 18, 2004, the Plaintiff lent KRW 22,000,000 to Defendant B without setting the interest and the due date.

(hereinafter “instant loan”). (b)

Defendant C, D, and F have jointly and severally guaranteed the loan obligations of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap1 to 5 evidence (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the above loans amounting to KRW 22,00,000,000, and damages for delay.

3. Determination as to the defendants' defense

A. The defendants defenses to the effect that they met all of the loans of this case. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this. Thus, the defendants' defenses to the effect that they met the loans of this case are without merit.

B. Furthermore, the Defendants asserted that the statute of limitations has expired since the statute of limitations expired as a commercial claim.

On the other hand, not only a claim arising from an act of a commercial activity for both parties, but also a claim arising from an act of a commercial activity for only one of the parties, also constitutes a commercial claim to which the period of extinctive prescription of five years under Article 64 of the Commercial Act applies. Such a commercial activity includes not only the basic commercial activity falling under any of the subparagraphs of Article 46 of the Commercial Act, but also the ancillary commercial activity which a merchant performs

(See Supreme Court Decision 93Da54842 delivered on April 29, 1994. In addition, Article 47(1) of the Commercial Act provides that "the act of a merchant on behalf of his/her business shall be deemed a commercial activity." Article 47(2) of the Commercial Act provides that "the act of the merchant shall be presumed to be an act of the merchant on behalf of his/her business." Thus, it is presumed that the act of the merchant on behalf of his/her business is an act of the merchant on behalf of his/her business and that the act