1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to the Plaintiff KRW 35,353,421 and Defendant B with respect thereto from December 1, 2017, and Defendant C with respect thereto.

1. The following facts of recognition may be acknowledged by integrating each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as a whole the purport of the entire pleadings:

On November 10, 2017, Defendant B drafted a letter of payment stating that “Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 46,553,421, including the individual goods price and the D delivery amount by the end of November 2017.”

B. Defendant B is the above 1.A.

On February 1, 2018, after the maturity date of this paragraph has expired, the Plaintiff on February 1, 201.

In this case, Defendant C signed and affixed a written confirmation of payment that confirms the payment of the money under subsection (1) within a prompt period of time, and Defendant C signed and sealed on the said written confirmation of payment that “It is confirmed that the said guarantor will pay the money in lieu of payment of the price of the goods (46,553,421 won) in lieu of payment of the price of the goods (46,53,421 won) to the Company, even if the said guarantor made a registration of ownership after completion of the construction of the E and F in South Korea, in which the said money was sold to the Company for the said payment.”

2. Determination

A. As to the issues, Defendant C asserted that Defendant C’s joint and several sureties’s joint and several sureties agreement was subject to registration of preservation of ownership after the completion of the building, but the above suspension condition has not yet been fulfilled.

In the case of a juristic act attached to an associate officer, it shall be deemed as a condition when it is reasonable to deem that the additional officer does not perform his/her obligation unless the facts indicated in the subordinate officer have occurred, and where it is reasonable to deem that the additional officer should perform his/her obligation even if not only the indicated facts have occurred but also the objection has become definite, it shall be deemed as the time limit fixed to determine whether

Therefore, certain facts are required for the repayment of the obligation already borne.