1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 40,249,086 and KRW 21,43,871 among them, from August 1, 2014 to the date of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 28, 2006, the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund filed a lawsuit for indemnity amount claim against the defendant and the joint guarantor B, who is the principal debtor for the indemnity liability under a credit guarantee agreement, with the Gwangju District Court 2006Kadan8713, which is the cause of the claim, and was sentenced to the judgment on July 28, 2006 that "the above judgment was finalized on December 24, 2002 to the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund as 18% per annum from December 24, 2002 to April 16, 2003; 16% per annum from the next day to June 30, 2006; and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment."

B. Thereafter, the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund recovered KRW 4,649,310 and appropriated it for the principal out of the aforementioned judgment amount claims, and the Plaintiff was transferred by the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund on September 25, 2014 the remaining principal and interest claims out of the said judgment amount.

(c)The Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund shall:

Around the date of assignment of claims indicated in paragraph (1), the defendant was notified of the above transfer.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay the amount stated in the purport of the claim to the plaintiff who acquired the claim from the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund, and on the other hand, the lawsuit of this case filed for the purpose of the extension of prescription due to the imminent completion of the extinctive prescription after the judgment in the

B. The defendant's argument on the defendant's assertion is alleged to the purport that the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim because he was in bankruptcy. Thus, the defendant's claim is not limited to the creditor's exercise of right in the lawsuit, but immunity decision should be confirmed in the individual rehabilitation procedure or bankruptcy procedure against the debtor.