1. Based on the Gwangju District Court Decision 2017Gapo1631 recommendations against the Plaintiff of the Defendants.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and G are married couple, and the Defendants are the successors of the deceased H (Death on November 28, 2016, hereinafter “the deceased”).

B. The Defendants asserted that, on June 2, 2011, the Plaintiff and G, as evidence, leased KRW 18 million (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”) to the Plaintiff and G, the Plaintiff and G (hereinafter “the Plaintiff”) KRW 18 million (hereinafter “the instant loan”) were leased to the Plaintiff and G on June 2, 2011. The Defendants filed a lawsuit seeking a loan with the Gwangju District Court Branch Decision 2017Gau1631 (hereinafter “the instant loan”). On March 3, 2017, the said court issued a recommendation for performance on the following grounds: “The Plaintiff and G jointly and severally agreed with Defendant C, KRW 4,565,456, and KRW 3,043,636, and the remaining Defendants, calculated at the rate of KRW 15% per annum from the day following the date of delivery of the copy of the instant complaint to the day of full payment.”

C. G was served on March 8, 2017 on the instant decision on performance recommendation, which was delivered to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff as the Plaintiff’s cohabitant, and thereafter, the instant decision on performance recommendation was finalized on March 23, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff did not borrow the instant loan from the Deceased, and only borrowed the instant loan from Gouss.

B. The Defendants’ assertion G not only prepared the instant loan certificate with the Plaintiff’s consent, but also constitutes the instant loan obligation as an ordinary household loan obligation, and thus, the Plaintiff is jointly and severally liable with G.

3. Determination

A. In the event that a final and conclusive decision on performance recommendation has become final and conclusive, the grounds for the failure or invalidation that occurred prior to the decision on performance recommendation with respect to the claims that served as the grounds for the relevant decision on performance recommendation may be asserted in the lawsuit of demurrer against the relevant decision on performance recommendation, and the burden of proof as to the grounds for objection in the lawsuit of objection against