1. The defendant is jointly and severally with the plaintiff Eul as to KRW 50 million and KRW 180,812,08 among them, from June 7, 2002 to 36,402.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Korea Technology Finance Corporation (the Korea Technology Finance Corporation changed its trade name) filed a lawsuit against the defendant, C, and B claiming the amount of subrogation, etc. under a credit guarantee agreement, and received the judgment of September 9, 2007 from the date of June 7, 2002 to the date of complete payment for KRW 325,089,684 from the date of June 7, 2002 to the date of complete payment for KRW 1,004,280 to the date of full payment for KRW 1,07,427,548 from the date of July 16, 202 to April 16, 200 to the date of full payment for KRW 18% per annum from September 9, 202 to April 16, 2003 to the date of full payment for KRW 325,09 to the date of April 27, 207 to the date of full payment.

(Seoul Central District Court 2007Kadan126445). The above judgment was finalized on October 16, 2007.

B. On September 27, 2012, the Korea Technology Finance Corporation transferred the claim for indemnity determined by the above judgment to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim on the same day.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap 1, 2, 3, and 4; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff KRW 500 million that the plaintiff seeks part of the judgment and damages for delay, such as the purport of the claim.

B. On this ground, the defendant asserts that the corporation cannot respond to the plaintiff's request because it closed its business and completed the registration of completion of liquidation.

However, the registration of the completion of liquidation of the corporation was completed.

Even if there is no assertion or proof as to the extinguishment of a claim, the claim in this case cannot be avoided solely on the ground of closure or liquidation, unless there is any assertion or proof as to the extinguishment of a claim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da66427, 73371, Feb. 11, 2003).

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion, we decide to accept the Plaintiff’s claim of this case on the grounds of its reasoning.