1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part of the Plaintiff A’s claim shall be modified as follows:

The defendant's plaintiff A.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 8, 2002, the Defendant lent KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff at the maturity of February 8, 2003, at the agreed interest rate of February 8, 2003, at the rate of 13.7% per annum, and at the rate of 18.5% per annum (hereinafter “instant loan claim”). In this case, Plaintiff B guaranteed the Defendant’s above loan obligation with the maximum guarantee limit of KRW 14 million with the maximum guarantee limit of KRW 14 million.

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

Plaintiff

A by May 29, 2009, paid the principal and interest of the above loan obligation. As of September 24, 2014, there were the principal and interest of KRW 7,210,172 (= principal interest of KRW 441,905 in interest of KRW 6,768,267).

C. On October 10, 2014, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiffs on the Incheon District Court 2014Guj198, the Incheon District Court 2014, and “the Plaintiff jointly and severally paid KRW 7,210,172 to the Defendant and KRW 441,905, whichever is 20% per annum from the next day of the service of the original copy of the instant payment order to the day of full payment” (hereinafter “instant payment order”) was finalized on February 17, 2015 against the Plaintiff and January 6, 2015 against the Plaintiff B.

On May 19, 2015, the Defendant seized Plaintiff A’s corporeal movables under the Incheon District Court Decision 2015No2303 (hereinafter “instant compulsory auction procedure”) with the title of execution of the final payment order, and on June 23, 2015, paid KRW 1,483,710 for the remainder of the sale price excluding auction expenses after being directly knocked at KRW 1,660,000 on the sale date.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap Nos. 1 and 2, Eul No. 1, Eul No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The Defendant’s assertion that Plaintiff A obtained the satisfaction of the Defendant, the obligee, as a result of the termination of enforcement based on the instant payment order against Plaintiff A, and thus, the Plaintiff A received the instant payment order.