A. On July 31, 2014, the Plaintiff, under Defendant C’s joint and several sureties, lent KRW 50 million to Defendant B, setting the due date as January 31, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 50 million and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from February 1, 2015 to December 29, 2018, which is the last delivery date of the copy of the instant complaint, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. On the argument of Defendant C, Defendant C asserts that the Plaintiff received all loans by accepting and operating the shop shop in the fourth floor of the Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government DD Building operated by Defendant B.

Although the fact that the plaintiff accepted and operated the shop shop as above is also recognized by the plaintiff, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff received the repayment of the loan in this case. Thus, the above argument by the defendant C cannot be accepted.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.