1. Each appeal by the Defendants is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the case, is that the court of first instance, dismissed the “ July 19, 2016” of the first instance judgment as “ July 19, 2013,” and, except adding the following judgments, is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance. Accordingly, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2 The Defendants asserts to the effect that the liability of the Defendants should be limited in consideration of various circumstances in accordance with the ideology of the damage compensation system, namely, fair and reasonable distribution of damages.

However, in this case, the Plaintiff filed a claim based on the Defendants’ joint and several sureties’s joint and several liability agreement, and the Defendants’ above claim should be restricted by the principle of good faith.

Even if ① limiting liability under the general principles such as the principle of good faith, which is to be effective, may cause serious threat to the principle of private autonomy or legal stability, and thus, it should be extremely exceptionally acknowledged based on prudentness (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Da45410, Jan. 27, 2004). ② The Defendants may incur damages to the Plaintiff, and the amount of damages is KRW 90,000,000, and ③ The proviso to the joint and several surety of this case provides that the Defendants’ joint and several surety’ joint and several surety’s liability is extinguished only when the Plaintiff recovered the sales amount of officetels (90,000,000) of each of the instant case’s officetels, in light of the above, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff’s exercise of rights is of a nature that cannot be used in light of the principle of good faith.

Therefore, the above assertion by the defendants is without merit.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants should be accepted for reasons.

The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and thus, the defendants' appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.