A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 300,000,000 to C from July 17, 2009 to December 30, 2009. Since the Defendant guaranteed the above loan obligation, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant guaranteed the guaranteed obligation to the Defendant.

B. Determination 1) In full view of the following: (a) No. 1; (b) evidence No. 2-1; (c) evidence No. 2-4; (d) evidence No. 3-1 through No. 3; and (c) witness witness testimony, the entire purport of the pleadings is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff continued to engage in money transactions with C, such as lending money to C from 2007 to receiving interest, etc.; (b) the Plaintiff and C reached July 17, 2009; (c) interest No. 200,000, interest No. 12,000, and July 17, 2015 (payment on July 14, 2015).

(3) On the same day, the Plaintiff’s mother’s four fixed time deposits (total transaction amount of KRW 143,525,219) in D’s name are cancelled. ④ The Plaintiff sent a content-certified mail demanding the Defendant as the surety to repay the principal on June 3, 2014 while he/she was unable to receive interest on the borrowed amount from C from July 2010, and the Defendant received it around that time. According to the above-mentioned facts, the Plaintiff and C received the loan amount of KRW 200,000,000,000, total of the existing borrowed amount and new borrowed amount on July 17, 2009 (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”).

(2) It is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff entered into a contract. On the other hand, the Plaintiff asserted that it additionally lent KRW 100,000,000,000 after July 17, 2009, and that considering the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff and C set up each loan certificate of KRW 230,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 as of October 7, 2009. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 21303, Dec. 30, 2009; Presidential Decree No. 22584, Dec. 30, 2009>