1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant A Co., Ltd. shall have KRW 99,371,405 and this from November 14, 1998 to January 25, 199.

The fact that the Plaintiff acquired the same claim against the Defendant A (hereinafter “Defendant A”) and the changed cause of the claim, the fact that the net F guaranteed the Defendant’s loan obligation, the fact that the Defendant B, C, D, and E, the heir of the network F, received the decision of the adjudication on the adjudication on the adjudication on the adjudication on the qualification of succession, is recognized as either the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1 and 2 (including the additional number), or the entire purport of each of the evidence Nos. 1, 150(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, or the parties were led to confession pursuant to the main sentence of Article 150(

Therefore, Defendant A, as the primary debtor, has a duty to pay the money indicated in the order, within the scope of the net F’s property inherited from the net F’s debt, as the heir of the network F, which is a joint and several surety, the amount indicated in the order equivalent to the inherited share among the net F’s debt.

As to this, Defendant A alleged to the effect that Defendant A did not have an obligation to pay the said money upon termination of the liquidation, but the obligation to the Plaintiff is not extinguished due to the liquidation of Defendant A.

In addition, Defendant A’s representative liquidator G was declared bankrupt and exempted from liability and thus cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim. However, Defendant A’s claim against Defendant A with separate legal personality cannot be asserted for the exemption of liability of a representative liquidator.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion is without merit.

The plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all.