1. As to KRW 62,093,326 and KRW 61,874,66 among the Plaintiff, Defendant A shall be from March 29, 2013 to July 10, 2013.

1. Each fact in the attached Form of the judgment on the plaintiff's claim against the defendant A is not clearly disputed by the defendant A, and thus, it is deemed that the plaintiff was led to confession under Article 150 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant A is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 62,093,326 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from March 29, 2013 to July 10, 2013, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 20% per annum from the following day to the day of full payment.

2. Determination as to the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B

A. In full view of the facts alleged in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 8, and the entire purport of the arguments as a result of this court's order to submit each of the following facts, it is recognized that defendant A entered into a contract under which he sells each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter in this case, "the instant real estate") which is the only real estate for himself in excess of his obligation on December 26, 2012 to defendant B (hereinafter "the instant sales contract"), and that defendant B completed the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to the instant real estate under the Daegu District Court's Pohang Port Branch Branch and No. 113043, Dec. 26, 2012.

B. 1) Determination as to the cause of the claim was made on the ground that the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity against Defendant A was established after the sales contract of this case subject to revocation of fraudulent act, but there was already been a basic legal relationship for the establishment of the claim for indemnity based on which the credit guarantee agreement of this case was concluded prior to that, and there was a high probability as to the occurrence of the claim based on the legal relationship as of February 24, 2013 after two months have elapsed since the date of the sales contract of this case. In fact, it was feasible on March 29, 2013 by the Plaintiff’s subrogation of the principal and interest of the loan of KRW 61,874,666 as of March 29, 2013, the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity is the right to be preserved for revocation of fraudulent act.