1. The Defendants jointly and severally against the Plaintiff B, KRW 51,428,572, and KRW 34,285,714, respectively, and the Defendant against the Plaintiff C and D.

Basic Facts

From November 2007 to August 201, 2014, Defendant E operated a general meeting of general members, and Defendant F served from November 2007 to June 25, 2014 as the prime secretary and the prime secretary, while managing Defendant E’s financial account, etc., and taking charge of the fund management affairs including the fund management affairs of the hospital, including the receipt of insurance money, the payment of benefits, and the disbursement of management expenses.

Defendant F transferred KRW 100,000 to Defendant E’s IBK account around July 26, 201, as the financial situation of the hospital is not good through Plaintiff D, and thus, money is necessary, A transferred KRW 20,000 to Defendant F around 201, and around July 26, 2013.

Since then, A received from Defendant F a loan certificate (No. 1; hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) indicated as “Defendant F, the creditor, debtor, Defendant E, and joint and several sureties,” and the debtor column of the loan certificate of this case includes the name of Defendant E, and the stamp image of Defendant E’s name was affixed next thereto.

A A died on January 6, 2015 during the instant lawsuit, and jointly succeeded to A’s property at the ratio of 3/7 shares in B’s spouse, 3/7 shares in B’s children, and 2/7 shares in A’s property.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (the statement No. 5 and the result of appraiser H’s stamp image appraisal), as it can be acknowledged that the following stamp image of defendant Eul’s name of the loan certificate of this case is made by the seal of defendant Eul, the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to be established. The evidence defense of defendant E is to be examined separately below), the party examination of the plaintiff Eul, and the determination of the ground for claim of judgment as to the purport of the whole oral argument, barring any special circumstance, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the plaintiffs, who are the successors of Gap, the debt of this case, KRW 120 million, and delay damages.

Defendant E-.