1. The Defendants jointly pay to the Plaintiff KRW 26,00,000 and Defendant B with full payment from November 29, 2015.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the Plaintiff set the Plaintiff’s payment period of KRW 10 million to Defendant B and KRW 10 million to December 30, 2010 as the payment period of KRW 30,000,000 on December 30, 201 of the same year as the payment period of KRW 30,000 as of December 29, 201; and on April 8, 2011 as the payment period of KRW 6 million as of May 7, 2011; and Defendant C guaranteed the above loan obligation.

B. Determination 1) Defendant B: A judgment by public notice (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act): Provided, That the statutory interest rate of Article 3(1) main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings shall be recognized only as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as the provision on the statutory interest rate of Article 3(1) was promulgated on September 25, 2015 and enforced on October 1, 2015, and the part in excess shall be dismissed. 2) According to the above recognition of Defendant C, Defendant C is jointly and severally with Defendant B, and as requested by the Plaintiff after the due date, liable to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay at the rate of 26 million won per annum from June 30, 2015 to September 30, 2015, and 15 per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

In regard to this, the above defendant made the defendant B, the principal debtor, and demanded payment only to the defendant C, the guarantor, so the right to defense of highest search by the guarantor can be established at the time of proving the fact that the principal debtor has sufficient means to repay and that it is easy to execute. The above defendant's assertion is without merit, since there is no evidence to acknowledge this.

2. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.