1. The Defendant’s annual interest in KRW 52,361,446 and KRW 12,063,351 among the Plaintiff, from February 22, 2014 to August 31, 2015.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings (including the fact that the defendant does not clearly dispute the changed cause) in each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including additional evidence number), the facts of the claim cause in the attached Form No. 1 (However, each of the "creditors" in the claim cause shall be deemed each "Plaintiff" and each "debtor" shall be deemed each "Defendant") and the changed cause of claim can be acknowledged.

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the total amount of remaining claims 52,361,446 won and 12,063,351 won among them, 12% per annum from February 22, 2014 to August 31, 2015, which is the date following the date of subrogation, the agreed ratio, 8% per annum from the following day to December 13, 2016, which is the date of delivery of a copy of the application for change of claim and cause of claim of this case, as sought by the plaintiff, and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. A summary of the assertion 1) The credit guarantee agreement asserted by the Plaintiff was concluded at the same time as a collective loan agreement, and the Plaintiff’s side did not comply with the duty to clearly explain and explain the guarantee at the time of the collective loan agreement (hereinafter “section 1”).

(2) The Plaintiff is not obligated to recover the amount of subrogation from the Defendant’s individual, but shall recover the amount of subrogation by claiming against the executor and the contractor in accordance with the intermediate payment service agreement between the executor and the lending financial institution, or by selling the apartment sold by the Defendant through the public auction for the apartment that the Defendant purchased.

(hereinafter referred to as “the second chapter”). The contract for sale in lots concluded between the Korea Land Trust and the Defendant was cancelled, which led to the Plaintiff’s repayment of the payment by subrogation from the Korea Land Trust. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim.