2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. On October 8, 2007, the deceased J borrowed KRW 19,000,000 from the Plaintiff on a yearly interest rate of 2% and on October 8, 2022 due date.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant loan”). (b)

The claims held by the Plaintiff against the deceased J as of May 26, 2014 are 18,221,590 won in total and 16,93,630 won in principal, interest and overdue interest, and 1,287,960 won in interest and overdue interest, and the overdue interest rate for the obligations of the deceased J is 8.5% per annum.

C. On the other hand, the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s instant loan amounting to KRW 24,700,000 on the guarantee limit.

The network J died on April 2013, and his heir and co-defendant C, D, E, F, G, H, and I of the first instance trial with the co-defendant B and their children of the first instance trial.

[Basic Facts] Gap evidence Nos. 1-4, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay at the rate of 8.5% per annum from May 27, 2014 to the date of full payment, for the amount of KRW 18,221,590 and the amount of KRW 16,93,630, which is the date following the date of settlement, within the limit of KRW 24,70,000,00, among the co-defendants of the court of first instance, who are the heir of the deceased J.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s assertion (1) was signed by the Defendant on the ground that he did not hear an explanation from the Plaintiff at the time of signing the Labor Guarantee Deed.

(2) The instant loan was loaned for the purpose of paying as lease deposit by the Network J while leasing a house owned by K.

However, the Plaintiff cannot be held liable to the Defendant as it neglected to collect the loans of this case by neglecting its duty to collect from the deceased J and K.

(3) The letter of guarantee in the name of the Defendant appears to have been prepared at the time of the first loan from the Plaintiff around October 25, 2005 by the deceased J, not the letter of guarantee drawn up at the time of the instant loan.

B. (1) The purport of the entire pleadings is as follows: (a) Gap evidence 1-2.