A. Defendant B: 35,000,000;

B. Defendant C shall be KRW 15,00,000 and each of the above amounts with Defendant B and each of them.

A. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in Gap evidence No. 1 (including additional numbers), the plaintiff lent KRW 35,000,000 to defendant B on June 20, 2009 (the due date for repayment of KRW 20,000,000) and at that time, defendant C (the father of defendant B) can recognize the fact that the defendant C (the father of defendant B) gave a guarantee for KRW 15,00,000 out of the above amount.

B. Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 35,00,000 won, Defendant C is 15,000,000 won out of each of the above amounts with Defendant B and each of them after the due date, and to pay 20% interest per annum from August 5, 2014 to the day of complete payment, which is the day following the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order sought by the Plaintiff.

C. The defendants asserted that they did not directly receive and use the above money from the plaintiff, and rather they used the money entirely by D, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this, and even if the actual user of domestic money is D, the actual user of domestic money still bears the responsibility to pay it to the plaintiff as long as the defendants agreed to pay it to the plaintiff. Thus, the above argument is without merit.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.