1. The Defendants jointly and severally pay KRW 41,929,382 to the Plaintiff, but Defendant C succeeds to the network D.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 5, 2001, the Defendant Limited Liability Company A (hereinafter “A”) obtained a loan from the Plaintiff at the rate of 15.43% per annum and 19% per annum with the joint and several guarantee of Nonparty D and Defendant B (hereinafter “instant loan”).

B. When Defendant A delayed the payment of the instant loan, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Defendant A, DoD, and Defendant B seeking the payment of the instant loan (or Mine District Court 2004Gadan21866), and the above court rendered a ruling on April 7, 2005 that the Plaintiff shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff 37,43,000 won and the amount calculated by the rate of 19% per annum from August 6, 2004 to the date of full payment, and the above ruling became final and conclusive around that time.

C. On September 18, 2010, the network D left Defendant B and its children, E, and died. D.

On September 28, 2010, Defendant B, E, and F filed a report of renunciation of inheritance with the Incheon District Court 2010-Ma2220 on September 21, 2010, and the said report was accepted on October 21, 2010. Defendant C, the mother of the network D, who became the deceased D’s heir due to the renunciation of inheritance by the first-class heir, filed a report of acceptance of inheritance by the Incheon District Court 2010-Ma2560 on November 4, 2010, and the said report was accepted on December 2, 2010.

E. The Plaintiff’s loan to Defendant A remains at KRW 41,929,382 as of October 10, 2014.

[Evidence Evidence] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant A is the principal debtor, Defendant B is the joint and several surety, and Defendant C is the heir of the network D, a joint and several surety, and is obligated to pay KRW 41,929,382 for the delayed payment of the loan of this case. However, Defendant C has the obligation to pay within the scope of the property inherited from the network D as it was subject to qualified acceptance.

B. Defendant B did not have an obligation to pay the said money as it renounced the net D’s inheritance of property.