1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. On December 30, 2011, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff supplied the automated parts of KRW 13,000,000 to B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”). In such a case, the Defendant, a director in the company B, jointly and severally guaranteed the Plaintiff’s obligation to purchase the goods.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 13,000,000 won for goods and delay damages.

B. The existence of guarantee intent is an issue of the parties’ intent interpretation and fact-finding to be determined by comprehensively considering the motive and background of the parties involved in the transaction, the form and content of the involvement, the purpose to be achieved by the transaction, the transaction practice, etc. However, in special circumstances where the guarantee is to be borne, the existence and scope of guarantee intention should be strictly limited and limited.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da98771, Apr. 28, 2011). Whether the Defendant jointly and severally and severally guaranteed the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay for the goods is insufficient to recognize such obligation solely on the basis of each of the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1-2, 2, and 3, and there is no other evidence to prove that the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay for the goods. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.