1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to the Plaintiff KRW 53,412,923 as well as 6% per annum from March 25, 2017 to April 3, 2017.

1. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including each number number. The defendant Eul's evidence Nos. 2) and the whole purport of the pleadings, the plaintiff entered into an agency contract with the defendant A who sells agricultural materials, etc. with the trade name "C" around November 2013. The defendant Eul jointly guaranteed the debt owed by the defendant A pursuant to the above agency contract. The plaintiff supplied the defendant A with agricultural PE film from the above date to the end of 2016, but did not receive the balance of the goods of KRW 53,412,923 from the defendant A. Thus, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 53,412,923 and the damages for delay calculated from March 25, 2017 to the date of delivery of a duplicate copy of the complaint of this case to April 6, 2017.

2. We examine Defendant B’s assertion that the agency contract (Evidence A2) in which Defendant B’s joint and several sureties’s joint and several sureties was forged.

According to the evidence Nos. 2 and 6-4 of the evidence Nos. 2 and 6-4, since the defendant B’s seal imprint affixed with the evidence Nos. 2 is recognized, the defendant B’s seal imprint is presumed to have been duly formed.

Thus, there is no evidence to prove that the evidence No. 2 was forged to the defendant B, and the defendant B's above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants is accepted in entirety.