1. The Defendant’s KRW 69,553,453 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 15% from October 26, 2016 to full payment.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, C prepared and issued a loan certificate on March 11, 2008 with D on July 10, 2009 to adjust the monetary claim relationship with D, and at the time C received comprehensive delegation from the defendant at the time, jointly and severally guaranteed the above debt against D on behalf of the defendant, and around August 24, 2016 by the plaintiff, "69,53,453 won with D against the defendant and C (the above amount of KRW 80,000,000,000 less the amount of KRW 10,46,547, and the amount of delay damages paid to D on September 18, 2009, and the amount of debt repayment damages paid to the defendant from 250,000 won to 365,5365,000 won and damages for delay from the next day of this case's.

2. The Defendant’s argument regarding the Defendant is declared bankrupt by Suwon District Court Decision 201Hadan7270, and the decision of immunity was granted as of May 1, 2013, 201, from Suwon District Court Decision 201Hau7270. The Defendant asserts to the effect that, although the instant claim is not indicated in the list of creditors of the above decision of immunity, it was due to the Defendant’s failure to know the existence of the obligation, the Defendant was exempted from the responsibility for the instant obligation.

In the proviso of Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, the term “a claim which is not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith” refers to a case where an obligor, despite being aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, does not enter it in the list of creditors. As such, when the obligor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, it is prescribed in the said proviso.