2. The plaintiff's primary claim against the defendant.

A. On August 25, 2015, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 300 million to Co-Defendant B Co-Defendant B, Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) of the first instance court (hereinafter “B”) at the maturity of payment on November 24, 2015, and KRW 45 million as interest.

(hereinafter “instant loan”). (b)

Co-Defendant D (name before the opening of name: E), and F, at the time of the above lending, jointly and severally guaranteed the loan obligations of this case to the Plaintiff, and the loan certificate (No. 1-1, hereinafter referred to as “the loan certificate of this case”) prepared at the time is written by the Defendant, other than D and F, as a joint and several surety.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The primary argument is that the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the instant loan obligations with D and F, and the Defendant is jointly and severally liable with B, D and F to pay KRW 300 million and delay damages to the Plaintiff.

B. Preliminary Defendant: (a) operated B with D and F as a partnership; (b) lent the name D and F to D and F; and (c) given that the instant loan was used as operating expenses of the above company and its members, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable with B, D and F under Articles 24 and 81 of the Commercial Act to pay the Plaintiff KRW 300 million and its delay damages.

3. Judgment on the main claim

A. Whether to acknowledge the authenticity of the relevant legal principles ought to be determined by the court based on free evaluation, based on the purport of all evidence and the entire pleadings. In light of the fact that the authenticity of a disposal document ought to be recognized in recognition of the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the content of the document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof that the content of the document is denied if the authenticity is recognized, it should be careful in recognizing the authenticity of the disposal document.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Da8362 Decided June 11, 2009, etc.). B.

Judgment

1. The Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the instant loan obligations.