1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Busan Savings Bank held a loan to B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Non-Party Company”) as listed below (hereinafter “instant loan”); from August 6, 2009 to May 24, 2010, the Defendant, who held office as the representative director of the Non-Party Company, was jointly and severally guaranteed the guarantee limit of KRW 17,710,00,000 on the following loans.

(hereinafter referred to as the “joint and several sureties of this case”). (b)

On August 16, 2012, the Busan District Court 2012Hahap4 decided bankruptcy on August 16, 201 and the plaintiff was appointed as bankruptcy trustee.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts that there is no dispute between the parties, Gap evidence 1 through 7, Gap evidence 9 through 14, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 17,710,000,000, within the limit of the guarantee limit of the joint and several sureties of the instant loans, except in extenuating circumstances.

B. The defendant asserts that on May 24, 2010, the representative director of the non-party company resigned from office and revoked the joint and several guarantee contract of this case with Busan Savings Bank and C, the new representative director of the non-party company, agreed to accept the debt.

In light of the following facts, the Busan Savings Bank cancelled the joint and several guarantee contract of this case with the defendant around May 24, 2010, according to the results of the fact that there is no dispute between the parties, the entry (including paper numbers) in Eul Nos. 6 through 11, and the fact inquiry conducted on July 18, 2016 for the Age Rating Information Company:

On the other hand, since the resignation of the representative director is a significant change in circumstances, the defendant argued that he did not have an obligation to pay the loan of this case since the contract of joint and several sureties was terminated on January 24, 2017. However, according to the Supreme Court Decision 9Da61750 Decided March 10, 200, the defendant is a joint and several sureties contract, which was issued by the defendant.