2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. According to the notarial deed No. 63 of 2015, signed by a notary public on February 6, 2015 (hereinafter “notarial deed”), E, the debtor, approved the fact that the debtor, the creditor, would bear the obligation of KRW 150,000,000,00 to the defendant, who is the debtor, and decided to pay the debt by December 30, 2015 through a three-time division.

And E guaranteed the above debt as the representative of the plaintiffs and the F Co., Ltd.

B. The plaintiff A is a person who married with E but was married on July 5, 2003, and the plaintiff B is a child of the plaintiff A and E.

[Ground] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Eul 1 evidence (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On January 2015, 2015, Plaintiff A issued a certificate of personal seal impression and a certificate of personal seal impression to E, as it is necessary for Plaintiff A to deal with the banking affairs of F Co., Ltd. (the Plaintiff A becomes a representative director upon the Plaintiff’s request).

Plaintiff

B On January 2015, inasmuch as it is necessary to get a loan of 337 square meters in the name of the Plaintiff B as security, B issued a certificate of personal seal impression and a certificate of personal seal impression to E.

However, E arbitrarily recorded the plaintiffs as joint and several sureties without obtaining the plaintiffs' consent or consent as to the joint and several notarial deeds of this case.

A joint and several surety of the plaintiffs in the notarial deed of this case is made by E, an unauthorized representative, and thus has no effect.

The guarantee under Article 3 (1) of the former Special Act on the Protection of Guarantee of Surety (hereinafter referred to as the "Special Act on the Protection of Guarantee of Surety") shall take effect only when the opinion is expressed in writing with the name and seal or signature of the guarantor.

However, since there is no seal or signature on the notarial deed of this case, the part of the plaintiffs' joint and several sureties on the notarial deed of this case is invalid.

Therefore, the authentication of this case is based on the Notarial Deed.