1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 40,000,000 as well as 12% per annum from October 14, 2010 to the date of full payment.

According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including branch numbers), defendant Eul Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "Defendant Co., Ltd.") received loans of KRW 250,00,00 from Eul Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "E"), the representative of which and defendant C’s comprehensive collateral guarantee (Limit of KRW 325,00,000) on May 8, 2007. The defendant Co., Ltd lost the benefit of time by delaying the repayment of the loan principal debt, and Eul transferred the loan to the plaintiff on May 19, 2010. After that, the defendant Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) filed a lawsuit against the defendant Co., Ltd. on the grounds of the claim stated in the attached Table (hereinafter “creditor”) (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.), and the debtor is deemed to be "the plaintiff Co., Ltd., Ltd., and the defendant Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant”) to which the claim against the defendant Co., Ltd. and the defendant Co., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant”) were assigned to 301.

Defendant C has become a guarantor while serving as an employee of the Defendant Company;

The argument is asserted.

The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit in order to interrupt the prescription of the obligation upon the final and conclusive judgment, and due to the validity of the final and conclusive judgment (s judicata effect), Defendant C cannot assert the fact that it is inconsistent with the facts recognized in the previous judgment (s judicata effect of Defendant C).

For this reason, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is accepted in full and it is decided as per Disposition.