1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 300,000,000 and the interest rate thereon from April 16, 2014 to the date of full payment.

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion on March 31, 2014, lent KRW 300 million to Defendant B, and Defendant C Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) jointly and severally guaranteed the said obligation.

The defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the above KRW 300 million and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. Defendant B’s assertion by the Defendants was merely lent KRW 300 million from Unified Construction Co., Ltd. on March 31, 2014, and did not borrow KRW 300 million from the Plaintiff.

2. Determination

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

B. (See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da23482 delivered on June 28, 2002).

According to the statement No. 1-1, Defendant B and the Defendant Company may recognize the fact that “Defendant B and the Defendant Company, on March 31, 2014, borrowed KRW 300 million from the Plaintiff on April 15, 2014, at the rate of 30% per annum, and at the rate of delay damages, at 30% per annum, and the Defendant Company shall provide the Plaintiff with a loan certificate stating that “The Defendant Company shall stand a joint and several surety.”

According to the above loan certificate, on March 31, 2014, the Plaintiff lent KRW 300 million to Defendant B at the maturity date of April 15, 2014 and at the rate of 30% per annum, and the Defendant Company may recognize the fact that it has jointly and severally guaranteed it. The only descriptions of the certificate Nos. 1 through 3 are insufficient to reverse it, and no other counter-proof exists.

C. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 300 million and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 30% per annum, which is the agreed damages for delay, from April 16, 2014 to the date of full payment, from April 16, 2014.

3. Conclusion, each claim against the Defendants by the Plaintiff is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.