The following shall be added to 4 pages 13 of the judgment of the first instance:

2) Defendant C asserts that the financial resources of Defendant A were sufficient at the time of concluding the instant contract to establish a mortgage and the instant contract.

In determining whether a juristic act by a joint and several sureties constitutes a fraudulent act, the general ability of the principal obligor is not an element, unless a creditor has a preferential right to payment because the right to preferential payment is established in the name of the principal obligor or a third party with respect to the real estate owned by the principal obligor or

(2) As seen earlier, the Defendants jointly and severally and severally guaranteed the Defendant Company’s indemnity liability against the Plaintiff (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Da13246, Jul. 8, 2003). As seen earlier, insofar as the Defendants do not have any assertion or verification as to the real estate owned by the Defendant Company or a third party, which is the primary debtor, that the Plaintiff is entitled to preferential reimbursement, such as the establishment of a collateral security right in the future of the Plaintiff, the above assertion is rejected

[Attachment 4] 14 of the first instance court's decision - - 14 of the 4th instance court's decision - - 14 of the 14th court's decision - - 5 Do 14 of the 5th 14th - " 3 of the 5th 19th , - 5 - 5 of the 5th 19th - " ........... the defendant C added the following contents after the 5th 5th - of the first instance court's decision. The defendant C asserts that it is improper to recognize all of the claims as the small property of the defendant B because the claims

The Plaintiff entered into a guarantee agreement with the Defendant Company for KRW 180,000,000, and issued a certificate to the Defendant Company.