1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 350,000,000 won and the Defendants A and B, respectively, on February 22, 2014.

1. On November 30, 2007, the New Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) extended a loan of KRW 6 billion (hereinafter “instant loan”) to Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) at the rate of 10.5% per annum, and on November 30, 2012 on the same day, the due date of payment was determined and extended (hereinafter “instant loan”). On the same day, Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co.”), the guarantee limit amount of KRW 6.883 billion, and Defendant C and Taeduk Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co.”), the respective guarantee limit amount of KRW 7.8 billion, and Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation to return the principal and interest of this case to Defendant C’s New Savings Bank (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) at the guarantee limit amount of KRW 6.9 billion.

As of January 10, 2014, the remaining principal and interest of the instant loan as of January 10, 2014 are KRW 7,402,425,614 in total (= Principal KRW 5,173,920,833 in total and KRW 2,228,504,781 in total).

The New Savings Bank was declared bankrupt on October 29, 2013 by Seoul Central District Court 2013Hahap161, and the plaintiff was appointed as bankruptcy trustee.

[Ground of Recognition] between the Plaintiff, Defendant A, and C: Each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the entire pleadings, and between the Plaintiff and Defendant B, Taeduk Construction, and Samduk Construction: Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act (Voluntary Confession)

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of recognition, the Defendants, as the principal obligor or joint and several sureties of the instant loan, are jointly and severally liable to pay the remaining principal and interest of the instant loan and damages for delay thereof to the Plaintiff.

B. Defendant A asserts to the effect that the entire amount of the instant loan could have been repaid. The Plaintiff stated to the effect that “the Plaintiff received KRW 423,664,786 on two occasions on August 28, 2014 and September 5, 2014 from Daom Co., Ltd., which purchased the instant loan claim as the secured claim, and subsequently revoked the registration of the creation of a mortgage.” The remainder of the principal and interest of the instant loan by stating that “the Plaintiff received KRW 423,664,786 from Daom who purchased the instant loan claim as the secured claim.”