1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 63,340,429 and KRW 57,340,429 from December 31, 2014 to May 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 27, 2013, the Plaintiff was awarded a contract with Defendant B, who operated D, with the amount of KRW 98,000,000 of the construction cost, among the Daegu E Apartment Construction Project (hereinafter “instant construction”).

Defendant C is actually operating Defendant C with children of Defendant B.

B. A part of the instant construction was added to the instant construction, and the Plaintiff completed the construction and claimed payment of KRW 110,000,000 to Defendant B by issuing a tax invoice on December 2, 2013.

C. On November 23, 2014, Defendant B did not pay the instant construction cost, the Plaintiff and Defendant C drafted an agreement with the following content (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

1. The debtor B and C, as joint and several sureties, agree that the obligee A has the following obligations:

Next debtor's payment of KRW 35,000,000 for advance payment of KRW 100,000,000 for tin works, excluding KRW 6,000,000 for tin works, among the construction of Daegu E-Building and Landscape Facilities, which was settled on October 17, 2013, and accounts payable for 65,00,000 for accounts payable.

2. The debtor and the joint guarantor shall pay the full amount of the above debt until December 30, 2014, and if the debtor and the joint guarantor fail to pay it, the amount of 6,000,000 won on the settlement statement shall be paid at the interest rate of the delayed payment.

In the agreement of this case, the defendant C signed and sealed as a joint guarantor, but there was no signature or seal from the defendant B.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the party concerned claims the payment of the money stated in the purport of the claim as the construction cost of this case, as stated in the agreement of this case.

As to this, Defendant B asserted that he did not agree with the Plaintiff on the same content as the written agreement of this case, and that Defendant C did not have the obligation of Defendant B, the principal debtor, and therefore, Defendant C did not have the responsibility of joint and several sureties.

In addition, the Defendants were executed by the Plaintiff.