A. On May 12, 2010, the Plaintiff leased KRW 200 million to the Defendant on May 12, 201, the interest rate of KRW 200 million per month, KRW 2.5% per month, due date for payment, May 12, 2011 (hereinafter “the first case loan”), the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”), and the Intervenor Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s loan obligations against the Plaintiff.

B. After that, on November 18, 2010 and February 8, 2011, the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 15 million to the Defendant, and on January 10, 201 and February 1, 2011, a total of KRW 100 million to the intervenors without setting each interest and due date.

(hereinafter in total, KRW 15 million, each of the above loans of KRW 100,000,000 shall be referred to as "second separate loans".

On January 20, 201, the Plaintiff also lent KRW 300 million to C with interest rate of KRW 2%, interest rate of KRW 2.5% per month, maturity of payment on July 20, 2011 (hereinafter “instant loan”). The Defendant and the Intervenor jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligations against the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5, 8, Gap evidence No. 9-1, 2, and Gap evidence No. 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, the defendant, who is a joint and several surety of the loan debt of this case, is liable to pay to the plaintiff 30 million won of the loan of this case and interest thereon or delay damages, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. On November 16, 2016, the Plaintiff’s summary of the allegation 1) is F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”).

) and the Defendant written a written agreement. At the time, F and the Defendant confirmed that the Plaintiff did not bear a separate obligation except a loan obligation based on a loan for consumption contract as of January 24, 2016. Accordingly, the Plaintiff may be deemed to have confirmed that the instant loan obligation had already been extinguished before November 16, 2016, or at least exempted the Defendant from the instant loan obligation.