1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 422,303,745 and KRW 365,989,905, among them, from August 28, 2017.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) The Plaintiff is the Defendant Company A (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) on March 23, 2016.

The term “transaction classification/products: Ceiling transaction classification/livestock products security loan/credit limit amount: 500,00,000 won: Limit period: 12 months; agreed interest rate: 8.90% per annum; overdue interest rate: 25% per annum; etc.; and thus, a monetary loan contract (hereinafter “instant loan contract”) is concluded.

(2) Defendant B, C, and D Co., Ltd. jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant Company’s obligations under the said monetary loan agreement. (2) The Plaintiff implemented each of the loans to the Defendant Company as indicated in the separate sheet of loan implementation in accordance with the instant loan loan agreement.

3) The Defendant Company failed to repay each of the above loans even after the expiry of the lending period under the loan agreement of this case and the lending period for each of the loans of this case, and the Plaintiff disposed of the collateral and appropriated the collateral as stated in the “accident Claim Management Register” as shown in the attached Table. [Grounds for Recognition] There is no dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (each of the entries and arguments including the serial number), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of the principal and interest of each loan under the loan for consumption contract of this case as described in paragraph (1) of this Article and damages for delay.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. Determination as to the assertion of the right to defense under Article 536(2) of the Civil Act 1) The summary of the Defendants’ assertion is the livestock products offered as security for transfer to the Plaintiff to secure the Defendants’ obligations under the loan agreement of this case (hereinafter “instant security”).

Since the possession was transferred to the Plaintiff, unlike general transfer for security, the Plaintiff is responsible for the preservation and management of the security.

In the event that the Defendants repay their loans, the Plaintiff shall return the security.