The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 1,084,436,250 and KRW 1,000,000 among them, from April 14, 2020.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 10, 2015, Defendant B entered into a loan transaction agreement (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) with the Plaintiff and Defendant B around November 12, 2020 on the expiry date of the loan period; the interest rate is the base interest rate of the Radar (P); and the interest rate for delay shall be determined by adding the overdue interest rate to the loan interest rate; and the interest rate for delay shall be determined by adding the overdue interest rate to the loan interest rate; and the loan transaction agreement (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”); and accordingly, the loan obligation was loaned KRW 1 billion.

A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) for which Defendant B was the representative director, created a collateral on the real estate owned by Defendant B to secure the obligation of the instant loan, and Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation of the instant loan.

B. As of April 13, 2020, the interest that Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff under the instant loan agreement is KRW 84,436,250, and the interest rate calculated according to the overdue period is KRW 7.04 per annum.

[Judgment of the court below] The ground for recognition is without merit, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the ground for appeal

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff 1,084,436,250 won with interest rate of 7.04% per annum from April 14, 2020 to the date of full payment, barring any special circumstance.

B. The Defendants asserted that the instant loan obligation is substantially Defendant B’s business obligation, not Defendant B, and that, as Plaintiff E (E) comprehensively takes over and advertised D’s entire business on August 19, 2016, it was the transferee who advertised the assumption of obligation pursuant to Article 44 of the Commercial Act, the Defendants filed the instant lawsuit after the lapse of two years from the date when the extinctive prescription under Article 45 of the Commercial Act was completed, the Defendants did not have any obligation to repay the instant loan obligation to the Plaintiff.

In addition, the Defendants are.