1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is running the sales, lease, maintenance and repair business of office equipment in the name of D.

B. Around January 2012, the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed C’s debt to a digital complex lease agreement between the Plaintiff and C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) on the extension and reconstruction site of the E high school in South Sea.

C. C leased a digital composite at each construction site, but failed to pay the rent. On March 24, 2014, the Plaintiff agreed to pay the remainder of the rent of KRW 3,604,480 to the Plaintiff by March 27, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is jointly and severally and severally liable to pay the unpaid rent and damages for delay as a joint and several surety since the defendant works as C's director and as a joint and several surety.

On the other hand, the defendant asserted that he did not have any obligation to respond to the plaintiff's claim since he guaranteed the joint and several liability for digital complex rent in the construction site for the expansion and reconstruction of the South Sea.

B. According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, Gap evidence No. 2 (Local Multilater RETRAL SERVE Agreement), the defendant can be found to have jointly and severally guaranteed Eul's obligation with respect to a lease contract for a type 1 unit of ICR-3380PF set up at the construction site for the extension and reconstruction of the E high school in South Sea around January 2012, 2012. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant jointly and severally guaranteed Eul's obligation for all rents to the plaintiff.

On the other hand, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged as comprehensively considering Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4 (including paper numbers), and the overall purport of the pleadings as a result of this court’s order to submit financial transaction information to the NH Nonghyup Bank, namely, the Plaintiff’s delivery of digital composite equipment from C on March 26, 2014, is unpaid on the following day.