1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 311,105,460 and KRW 301,917,860, respectively, from September 10, 2016 to September 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant A, a co-owner of the forest E in Namnam-gun, Namnam-gun, and 30,083 square meters of forest land, who is engaged in manufacturing, mining, and wholesale business in the same forest as F with the trade name, such as diastones, diastones, and pots in the above forest after obtaining a mining right permit under the Mining Industry Act. On April 1, 2010, the Gun has granted permission to convert the use of a mountainous district to Defendant A by setting the mountainous district into the said forest as 18,915 square meters, the area for conversion of a mountainous district as 18,915 square meters, the purpose of conversion of a mountainous district as mining development, and the exclusive use period from March 26, 2010 to February 28, 2015.

B. The Plaintiff, under the joint and several guarantee of Defendant B, C, and D, entered into a guarantee insurance contract for authorization and permission with the insurance period from March 30, 2010 to August 28, 2015 (hereinafter “instant guarantee insurance contract”), and finally entered into an amendment contract with the insurance amount of 416,697,000 won on April 15, 2013, and the expiration date of the insurance period until October 28, 2015.

C. On February 17, 2015, Defendant A applied for the extension of the period of temporary use of the forest land in question to the head of the Gun having jurisdiction over the said forest land, but the Gun has rejected the application on March 19, 2015 on the ground that “the incidental requirements for the development of the mine were not satisfied because Defendant A failed to obtain residents’ consent to reuse the forest land owned by the forest fraternity that was being used with the consent of the G forest community.”

The defendant A filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the above rejection disposition (Seoul District Court 2015Guhap10841), but the dismissal decision was pronounced, and the defendant A's appeal and appeal were all dismissed. D.

Then, on March 2, 2016, the Republic of Korea has to carry out a vicarious execution upon the non-performance of the obligation to restore the permitted temporary use of the said temporary use of the said land.