1. As to Defendant B’s KRW 40,946,40 and KRW 20,000 among them, Defendant B shall be from June 30, 2005 to KRW 20,946,400.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B entered into a monetary transaction and goods transaction with the Plaintiff from February 18, 2005 to December 12 of the same year. Around February 18, 2005, Defendant B settled the amount of debt to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff up to that date at KRW 30,946,400, and divided it to pay KRW 10,946,400 to the Plaintiff respectively until April 30, 2005. In addition, around February 18, 2005, Defendant B agreed to borrow KRW 10,000,000 with the Plaintiff as March 30, 2005, and received KRW 10,000 from the Plaintiff around the same month.

B. In the surety column of the letter of confirmation of payment (No. 2) regarding each of the above arrangements, the seal of the defendant C is affixed to the name of the defendant C.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. The Plaintiff’s claim as to the Defendant B for the agreed amount and the borrowed amount of KRW 40,946,400 under each of the above agreements with respect to the Plaintiff as to the claim, and damages for delay

B. Some of the dismissed parts of the Plaintiff claimed damages for delay from June 30, 2005 for 20,946,400 of the above KRW 40,946,400, but the above KRW 20,946,400 was due on June 30, 2005 as seen earlier, and thus, the part seeking payment in excess of the amount stated in paragraph (1) of the Disposition is rejected.

3. The plaintiff, at the time of each of the above agreements, has jointly and severally guaranteed the above agreements and loans against the plaintiff by the defendant C at the time of the above agreement, so the defendant C is jointly and severally liable to pay the amount stated in the purport of the claim to the plaintiff with the defendant B. Thus, as seen earlier, the stamp image attached to the defendant C's name, which is accompanied by the defendant C's certificate No. 2 (defluence of the confirmation letter), is based on the seal of the defendant C. However, on the other hand, there is no dispute between the parties that the defendant B affixed the seal of the defendant C on the name of the defendant C on the letter of confirmation of payment.