1. The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 747,733,458.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 30, 2008, Solomon Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Slomon Savings Bank”) (hereinafter “Slomon Savings Bank”) designated and lent KRW 3.7 billion per annum to Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”) by 11% per annum, 25% per annum, 25% per annum, and 30 January 30, 2009.

B. Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant 2”), C, and D respectively jointly and severally guaranteed Defendant 1’s obligations to Non-Party Bank including the above loans up to the limit of KRW 4.8 billion.8 billion.

C. The non-party bank collected approximately KRW 4 billion out of the principal and interest of loans by disposing of real estate, which is a trust property provided by Defendant 1 as security, but remains a total of KRW 747,733,458 as the remaining loan interest and provisional payment (hereinafter “loan interest”).

On April 30, 2013, the non-party bank was declared bankrupt by the Seoul Central District Court 2013Hahap46, and the plaintiff was appointed as the bankruptcy trustee on the same day.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap 1 to 3, 6 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 747,733,458, including the remaining interest on loans.

B. As to this, Defendant 1, Defendant 2 and Defendant C have asserted that the statute of limitations has expired, such as the remaining loan interest, and thus, the fact that the period for repayment of the above loan claim was agreed on January 30, 2009 is as seen earlier, and it is apparent in the record that the instant lawsuit was filed on February 13, 2014, which was five years after the said lawsuit was filed.

However, according to the evidence evidence Nos. 4 through 7, the non-party bank can recognize the fact that it disposed of the above trusted on December 22, 2009 and received reimbursement of approximately KRW 4 billion out of the above principal and interest of loan. Thus, the above statute of limitations is interrupted. Thus, the above defendants' defense is without merit.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified, and it is so ordered as per Disposition by admitting all of the claims.