1. The defendant (Appointeds) and the appointed parties are jointly and severally against the plaintiff KRW 56,04,728 and KRW 24,140,415 among them.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. 1) The Plaintiff did not dispute a loan agreement between the selected party and the Plaintiff on April 18, 2005 with a loan amounting to KRW 100 million, and with a repayment date as of April 18, 2006 (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”).

2) The Defendant (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Defendant”) guaranteed to the Plaintiff all obligations arising from credit transactions currently and in the future, within the limit of KRW 130,000,000,000,000. The settlement term was set in the future designation type.

3) The Plaintiff entered into an additional agreement that extends the repayment date of the instant loan agreement with the Defendant and the designated parties on April 15, 2009. (4) On October 21, 2014, the Plaintiff’s claim for the principal and interest of loan under the Plaintiff’s loan agreement as of October 21, 2014 is KRW 56,04,728 (=the principal and interest of the loan principal amount of KRW 24,140,415, interest and overdue interest KRW 31,904,313).

B. The Defendant and the designated parties are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 56,04,728 of the principal and interest of the loan and KRW 24,140,415 of the principal and interest of the loan from October 22, 2014 to January 7, 2015, the delivery date of the complaint of this case, 17% per annum under the agreement, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the day of full payment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription

A. The Defendant had already completed the five-year extinctive prescription of commercial claims by November 21, 2014, which was the filing date of the instant lawsuit after November 18, 2009, the final transaction date under the instant loan agreement.

B. The statute of limitations is five years, since a claim under the instant loan agreement constitutes a commercial claim.

On September 10, 2013, the Defendant, through a mobile phone phone phone phone phone phone of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, made a telephone conversation with the content that the Defendant would pay in installments, even if there is a little time for doing so.

As a ground for the interruption of extinctive prescription.