There is no dispute between the parties that the defendant, a joint and several surety, like the cause of the claim (However, the creditor is the plaintiff, the debtor is the defendant), is liable to pay the money stated in the order to the

As to this, the defendant asserts that the corporate rehabilitation procedure commences for the medical corporation B (hereinafter "B"), which is the primary debtor, and that the plaintiff is repaid in accordance with the rehabilitation plan since the rehabilitation plan is authorized, the claim against the defendant is unjust.

Therefore, the rehabilitation plan does not affect the rights of the rehabilitation secured creditor against the guarantor of the debtor for whom the rehabilitation procedure has commenced (Article 250(2)1 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act). Therefore, if the plaintiff has not been reimbursed despite the repayment under the rehabilitation plan B with respect to the plaintiff's loan claims, the plaintiff may file a claim against the defendant who is the joint and several sureties and the principal debtor, within the scope of the guarantee limit.

However, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit, since the plaintiff did not prove that he received additional repayment from B according to the rehabilitation plan.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.