구상금
1. The Plaintiff:
A. (1) On December 16, 2014, Defendant A Co., Ltd.: (a) KRW 203,945,205 and KRW 200,000 among them, respectively.
1. The plaintiff's judgment on the plaintiff's claim is asserted as the cause of the claim of this case as shown in the attached Form (However, with respect to defendant G, the lawsuit is withdrawn), and the whole purport of the argument can be acknowledged in light of each of the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including the number of pages).
2. As to Defendant B’s assertion, Defendant B asserted to the effect that he only issued a seal imprint certificate and an authorized certificate as necessary for the agency’s business, and that there is no sign of joint and several sureties. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s claim. In full view of the purport of oral argument in the entries in the evidence No. 4-3, the joint and several sureties contract among the performance guarantee insurance of this case was made by the electronic signature of Defendant B, “the issuing agency: ysgn, serial number of the certified certificate: I”, and all of the confirmation at the bottom of the part of the performance guarantee insurance agreement of the performance (payment) guarantee insurance and at the bottom of the main description of the joint and several sureties agreement, “the electronic fact is recognized.” If an electronic document has a certified digital signature affixed thereon, the digital signature is presumed to have been signed, signed, or sealed by the signatory (Article 3 of the Digital Signature Act), and there is no ground to view that the Defendant’s joint and several sureties contract of this case was used as a means of verifying electronic documents other than the issuing company’s identity.
3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.