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

A. The Plaintiff entered into a transaction agreement on the supply of goods, settlement of prices, etc. with D, which is a “C”, around July 1, 2006, when manufacturing and selling synthetic resin products (the change from LG chemistry to LGS to LGS), and entered into such transaction agreement with D, which is a B, a total market, etc., and concluded the contract period from July 1, 2006 to March 31, 2007.

B. Around June 2006, the Plaintiff, a parent of D, and the Defendant, signed and received a joint and several guarantee form stating that all of the goods payment obligations against D against D were jointly and severally guaranteed by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant guarantee form”). The instant guarantee form does not specifically state the guarantee period.

C. Around March 22, 2012, the Plaintiff received KRW 200 million from E as payment for the payment for the purchase of goods to the Plaintiff. After that, the Plaintiff cancelled the registration of the establishment of the establishment in the name of the Plaintiff located in the name of the Plaintiff, which was established by the head of Si/Gun/Gu 215 Dong 108.

The Plaintiff drafted an annual agreement on the supply of goods and the settlement of prices with D from around 2007 to April 1, 2014, but did not prepare and deliver a separate certificate from the Defendant.

F. As of April 2015, D’s obligation to purchase goods against the Plaintiff is KRW 237,970,223.

2. The party's assertion and judgment

A. (1) The plaintiff's assertion (1) asserts that the defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay 237,970,220 won to the plaintiff as a joint and several surety, since the defendant has jointly and severally guaranteed all of the goods price obligations against the plaintiff without setting the guarantee period.

(2) The defendant's assertion that not only the guarantee period has expired, but also the plaintiff's joint and several surety obligation has expired by receiving KRW 200 million from E on March 22, 2012.

B. It is not clear in the principal contract arising from the continuous credit relationship.