The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The judgment below

According to the reasoning, the court below held that the plaintiff's joint and several guarantee agreement entered into between B and the defendant also provides that the plaintiff shall not have a right to indemnity against the defendant even if he/she performs his/her original obligation as a credit guarantee. According to the credit guarantee agreement entered into between B and the defendant, it is acknowledged that the plaintiff and C have signed and sealed it as a joint and several surety as shown in the loan agreement entered into between B and the defendant, but the following facts are considered comprehensively based on the evidence as stated in its reasoning. In other words, B applied for a loan with the amount of KRW 100 million in order to obtain a loan from the two main livestock cooperatives around December 7, 1998, and the defendant as a credit guarantee agency also submitted an application for a credit guarantee with the amount of KRW 100 million in terms of the loan agreement and the credit guarantee agreement entered as a joint and several surety, and the defendant, after examining the credit guarantee agreement entered in B and the credit guarantee agreement entered in B as a corrective credit guarantee agreement and the amount of KRW 500,000,00,000.