1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant C and D shall be dismissed.

2. The remaining Defendants shall be jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff on 353,915.

1. According to the evidence Nos. 1 and 1 evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of the judgment on the legitimacy of the lawsuit against Defendant C and D, Defendant C filed an application for individual bankruptcy and immunity under the Suwon District Court Decision 2007Hadan851, 2007Ma8887 on June 29, 2007. The above court declared bankrupt on January 17, 2008 and rendered a decision of immunity on March 31, 2008, and confirmed the above decision of immunity on March 31, 2008. Defendant D filed an application for immunity under the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2007Hau275, 207Hau2779 on January 19, 207, and the above court determined the immunity by declaring bankruptcy and immunity on May 15, 2007 and around June 29, 207.

In addition, on May 21, 2012, after each of the above immunity decisions became final and conclusive, the Plaintiff acquired the claim for reimbursement against the above Defendants, the bankrupt, by discharging the guaranteed obligation to the non-party bank on May 21, 2012. The Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement against the above Defendants is not a new claim after immunity is granted, but a bankruptcy claim against the above Defendants, which is a future claim, has already been realized, barring any special circumstances (see Article 427(2) and (1) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act). Accordingly, the Plaintiff attached real estate owned by the Defendant Limited Company (hereinafter “Defendant A”) after a credit guarantee accident occurred in 202, and conducted the auction procedure. The Plaintiff was taking measures to preserve the above claim by various means, such as cancelling the disposal of Defendant E’s property on the ground of fraudulent act. In particular, Defendant D is the actual operator of Defendant A, who is the above Defendants, and the above Defendants did not know that the above obligor’s claim for reimbursement had existed in the obligee’s list and its claim for reimbursement.