1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff lent KRW 200 million to D as the introduction of C, and the defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the debt borrowed to D.

Since D, the principal obligor, paid only KRW 180 million out of KRW 200,000,000, which is the principal obligor, the Defendant, a joint guarantor, is obligated to pay KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff, the obligee, and the sum of interest accrued from September 1, 201 to November 201, 201, and the Plaintiff seek payment of KRW 50,000,000 and damages for delay.

2. In full view of the description of evidence No. 1, witness D’s testimony, and part of C’s testimony, D borrowed KRW 200 million from D around May 201, and the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed D’s debt, and C lent KRW 100 million to D when borrowing KRW 200 million from D and the Defendant did not know the existence of the Plaintiff at the time of borrowing KRW 200 million from C.

According to the above facts, since the creditor of the loan claim of this case is not a plaintiff, the plaintiff's claim based on the premise that the plaintiff is a creditor of the loan claim of this case is without merit.

In addition, even if the Plaintiff is a creditor of the instant loan claims, D’s repayment of KRW 200 million on August 31, 201, and thereafter re-loaned KRW 20 million from C, the instant loan claims were extinguished due to the lack of dispute between the parties.

Therefore, under the premise that part of the loan claim of this case is remaining, the plaintiff's claim seeking the performance of the guaranteed obligation against the defendant who is a joint and several surety is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.