A. On November 26, 2012, the New Electric Power Bank (hereinafter “New Power Bank”) entered into a contract with Defendant A to lend KRW 170 million (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) and set the maturity on November 26, 2017, the payment period and method of interest as of November 26, 2017, the interest payment period and method as of January 1, 201, and the interest rate as 22% per annum.

Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligations of Defendant A on the same day.

B. Defendant A designated the Agricultural Cooperative Account (Account Number C) in the name of Defendant A as the receipt account of loans on the same day. On the same day, the Plaintiff transferred 169,925,000 won of the remaining loans, excluding the revenue stamp tax of KRW 75,00,00, to the said Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of Defendant A.

C. After that, Defendant A lost the benefit of time due to delinquency in part of the principal and interest of loans under the instant loan agreement.

As of February 25, 2013, the principal remaining under the loan agreement of this case is KRW 163,039,651.

E. On July 2, 2014, the Plaintiff merged with Nonparty Association.

[Ground of recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 6 (including paper numbers), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, Defendant A is the primary debtor, and the Defendant Company is jointly and severally liable as a joint and several surety to pay to the Plaintiff 163,039,651 won of the outstanding principal of the loan and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 22% per annum, which is the overdue interest rate from February 26, 2014 to the date of full payment.

B. The Defendants asserted that the Defendants did not receive a loan under the instant loan agreement, and that they could not accept the Plaintiff’s claim since they conspired with D, E, F, etc., a staff member in charge of the Plaintiff’s loan, conducted a loan by calculating excessive security price of the vehicle and acquired the loan by fraud.

Domins, Domins, .