A. The Plaintiff’s 20,000,000 won on February 29, 2008 to Defendant B, and the same year

5. A total of KRW 50,000,000, including KRW 30,000,000 was lent.

B. On June 2008, the Plaintiff and Defendant B agreed to pay KRW 57,00,000,000 to the above loan by June 25, 2008 (hereinafter “instant debt”). In preparing the loan certificate, the Plaintiff and Defendant B entered Defendant C’s name and personal information as the guarantor and affixed a seal imprint, and attached Defendant C’s certificate of personal seal impression.

C. Defendant B repaid KRW 7,00,000 out of the above loan debt after the instant lawsuit was filed.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the determination on the claim against Defendant B, according to the above facts, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 50,000,000 won and the interest rate of 5% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act from June 26, 2008 to July 28, 2015, which is the date of the last delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case, from June 26, 2008 to September 28, 2015; 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to September 30, 2015; and 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to

B. According to the reasoning of the judgment as to the claim against Defendant C, the Plaintiff alleged that Defendant C entered into a joint and several surety agreement on behalf of the Defendant C at the time the loan certificate of this case was prepared, and thus, there is no dispute between the parties, and according to the entries and the purport of the whole pleadings as to the claims against the Plaintiff, the Defendant B entered the Plaintiff’s personal information in the guarantor column while preparing the loan certificate of this case as to the obligations of this case, and affixed the seal imprint of the Defendant C, and the seal imprint of the Defendant C was affixed. However, it is recognized that there is a seal impression issued by the Defendant C, but the Defendant C was not at the site at the time the loan certificate of this case was prepared