1. The Defendant (Appointed Party) and the Appointed Co., Ltd. are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 70,000,000 and the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff: (a) around June 24, 2016, around 2016, KRW 10,000,000 to the Appointed Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Appointed Co., Ltd”); and (b) the same year

7. Around December 12, 198, paid 60,000 won respectively.

B. Around November 22, 2016, the designated company: (a) prepared a loan certificate (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”); and (b) attached the name certificate of the designated company’s seal impression to the Plaintiff; (c) the date and time of the loan to the Plaintiff; (d) the respective payment dates of the loan to the Plaintiff; (d) the interest rate per annum; (d) 10% per annum per annum; and (d) December 30, 2016; and (e) written the loan certificate (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”); and (d) signed the said loan certificate with Nonparty E as a joint and several surety.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 6 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As long as the formation of a disposal document is recognized as authentic, the court must recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposal document, unless there is clear and acceptable counter-proof to deny the contents of the statement.

In a case where there is a dispute over the interpretation of a juristic act between the parties and the parties concerned, the interpretation of the intent expressed in the disposition document shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules by comprehensively examining the contents of the text, the motive and background of the juristic act, the purpose to be achieved by the juristic act

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Da235647, Jul. 12, 2018). (B)

In this case, according to the above facts, as stated in the language and text of the loan certificate of this case, the designated company established a loan agreement between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff for consumption with a total of KRW 70,000,000 per annum, agreement rate of KRW 10% per annum, and due date of payment on December 30, 2016, and the Defendant (Appointed Party) guaranteed the Plaintiff the obligation to refund the loan under the loan agreement of this case.

On the other hand, the defendant (appointed party) has the obligation to return the borrowed money.