1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant’s credit guarantee agreement and auction proceeding 1) The Defendant is a stock company B on October 30, 2008 and May 17, 2012 (hereinafter “B”).

(i) the conclusion of each credit guarantee agreement with each other (hereinafter referred to as “each credit guarantee agreement of this case”).

(B) On May 17, 2012, the building B and the building C of the Subdivision-gu, Sungnam-si (hereinafter “instant building”).

As to the obligor B and the maximum debt amount of KRW 2.827 billion, the establishment of a mortgage agreement was concluded with the Suwon District Court on May 18, 2012, which was received on May 18, 2012, and completed the establishment of a mortgage agreement under Article 29533 of the Act. Meanwhile, each of the credit guarantee agreements of this case was jointly and severally guaranteed by D, E,F, G, and H. Based on each of the credit guarantee agreements of this case, B was financed by the Industrial Bank of Korea, but the Defendant failed to repay the loan, thereby paying the loan amount of KRW 2,230,579,417 to the Industrial Bank of Korea on August 12, 2013.

3) As B failed to repay the above indemnity liability against the Defendant, the Defendant filed an application for voluntary auction of the instant building with the Suwon District Court Sungnam Branch I on August 30, 2013 (hereinafter “instant auction”) (hereinafter “instant auction”).

(4) On the other hand, the owner of the instant building site L and M demanded removal of the instant building site on September 11, 2013 and filed a lawsuit for removal of the building and delivery to Suwon District Court. On July 22, 2014, the said court rendered a judgment to deliver the instant building site to B and remove the instant building site.

(2013Gahap9600). Although the Seoul High Court appealed on January 16, 2015, the Seoul High Court dismissed B’s appeal (2014Na201323), the second appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court on July 9, 2015.

(2015Da208719). (b)

The plaintiff's successful bid and the removal of the building are participating in the auction of this case.