A. (1) On February 22, 2013, Defendant A issued a credit guarantee certificate of KRW 20,000,000 of the guaranteed principal from the Plaintiff, and submitted it to the Bank of Korea on the same day, and received a loan of KRW 20,000,000 from the said Bank.

(2) As Defendant A was unable to repay the principal and interest of the loan, the Plaintiff made a substitute payment of KRW 20,219,178 on April 16, 2014 due to Defendant A’s failure to pay the said principal and interest of the loan, the amount remaining after recovering KRW 204,650 on the same day is KRW 20,014,528.

(3) The amount to be repaid by Defendant A under a credit guarantee agreement with the Plaintiff is KRW 20,014,528 as well as the procedural costs required for preserving the claim, etc., 1,057,700 as well as damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum on the amount of subrogated payment.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, A1 through 6]

B. Determination of Defendant A is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 21,072,228 (i.e., the remaining amount of subrogated payment of KRW 20,014,528, and the expenses for the procedure of compensating for the amount of subrogated payment of KRW 1,057,70) and, among them, the amount of subrogated payment of KRW 20,014,528, which is the date of subrogated payment, from April 16, 2014 to December 19, 2014, when the copy of the complaint of this case was served on the Defendant, 15% per annum, which is the rate of delayed payment damages, and 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day

2. The fact that the establishment of a fraudulent act and a claim for compensation for value between Defendant A and Defendant B was recognized (A) Defendant A shared the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with Defendant B. However, on November 7, 2013, Defendant A donated 1/2 shares of 1/2 to Defendant B.

At the time, Defendant A did not have any other property that could constitute a responsible property in addition to the share of the instant real property.

(B) As to the claim for return of unjust enrichment against Defendant A, Defendant A’s claim for restitution of unjust enrichment is examined separately from the following 3-B. (B) Defendant B donated the instant real estate share to Defendant A, and thereafter, the said claim to Defendant D.