1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 139,918,341 as well as KRW 32,941,287 among them, from April 30, 2015 to the day of full payment.

1. According to Gap evidence Nos. 1-2 and the purport of oral argument as to the cause of the claim, if the plaintiff borrowed funds from the defendant, the defendant, B, C, and D to E under joint and several sureties, 96,298,63 won of general loans (the principal of 50 million won shall be 32,941,287 won, and interest interest 63,357,376 won from Jan. 10, 196 to Oct. 4, 2004) and the defendant's claim for damages for delay calculated at the rate of 222% per annum from Oct. 6, 2004 to Oct. 25, 207, the defendant's claim for damages for delay against the defendant was rejected at the rate of 96,63,64,67,67,967, and the defendant's claim for damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20,97,97,975,967, and 294,5,57.1.

However, there are special circumstances, such as interruption of prescription, even if a new suit based on the same subject matter of lawsuit is exceptionally allowed, the judgment of the new suit does not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit. Therefore, the court in the subsequent suit cannot re-examine whether the requirements for claiming the established right are satisfied.

Therefore, the defendant.