A. Defendant B’s KRW 33,00,000 and interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from July 31, 2016 to the date of full payment.

A. On March 10, 2012, the Plaintiff leased KRW 3 million to Defendant C on or after the due date set on September 9, 2012, and Defendant B jointly and severally guaranteed Defendant C’s above loan obligation.

B. On June 20, 2013, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 28.5 million to Defendant B within three months after the end of the judgment of 2012Gahap4791.

C. On July 19, 2014, the Defendants prepared and provided to the Plaintiff a letter of payment stating that the sum of the loan amount of the above KRW 3 million and the interest accrued up to that time shall be KRW 4.5 million jointly and severally repaid until October 18, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the loan amount of KRW 28.5 million, the agreed amount of KRW 33 million, and delay damages. Defendant C is jointly and severally liable with Defendant B to pay the agreed amount of KRW 4.5 million and delay damages.

Furthermore, although the Plaintiff asserted that Defendant C is jointly and severally liable to repay the borrowed amount of KRW 28.5 million with Defendant B, it is not sufficient to accept the Plaintiff’s statement on the evidence No. 3 alone, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

3. Accordingly, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from July 31, 2016, the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, to the day of full payment as requested by the Plaintiff. Defendant C is jointly and severally liable with Defendant B to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 4.5 million won per annum from July 31, 2016 to the day of full payment. Defendant C is jointly and severally liable with Defendant B, as the day following the day of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, and as the day of full payment, it is reasonable for Defendant C to dispute as to the existence or scope of its obligation from July 31, 2016 to the day following the day of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, as sought by the Plaintiff.