1. The Defendants jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff KRW 189,747,362 and, among them, the Plaintiff:

A. From March 15, 2005 to March 15, 2005, for KRW 89,718,280.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the arguments set forth in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund filed a lawsuit against the defendants at Daegu District Court 2007Da49981, Aug. 23, 2007 with the indemnity amount of 189,747,362 won and 89,718,280 won which are jointly and severally imposed on the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund, with 14% per annum from March 15, 2005 to June 14, 2005; 16% per annum from the following day to June 27, 2007; 20% per annum from the next day to June 27, 2007 to the date of full payment; 30% per annum from the following day to June 23, 2007 to the date of full payment; and 30% per annum from the following day to May 23, 2006 to the date of full payment.

Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to pay the above judgment amount to the Plaintiff as the assignee of the bonds.

2. As to this, the Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff’s claim had expired after the completion of prescription, but the extinctive prescription of the claim established by a judgment becomes ten years (Article 165(1) of the Civil Act). The Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund filed a lawsuit against the Defendants for the payment of indemnity and received a judgment of acceptance by the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund, and the facts that this judgment became final and conclusive on September 8, 2007 and September 12, 2007 are as seen earlier, and it is apparent in the record that the Plaintiff filed an application for the instant payment order on July 6, 2017, which was ten years after the lapse of the aforesaid ten-year period. Therefore, the extinctive prescription of the Plaintiff

Therefore, the defendants' assertion is without merit.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by admitting the plaintiff's claim of this case.