1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. On February 26, 2012, the Plaintiff, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, lent KRW 100,000,000 to the Defendant, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the said amount to the Plaintiff. Even if a domestic limited liability company C borrowed the said amount from the Plaintiff, the Defendant, who signed to the effect that he/she is responsible, should bear the responsibility as a guarantor.

B. The defendant limited liability company C borrows the above money from the plaintiff, and there is no fact that the defendant guaranteed the above company's debt.

2. The Defendant borrowed KRW 100,000 from the Plaintiff on the sole basis of the judgment knife, Gap evidence No. 1 (Incompetence).

It is insufficient to recognize that the debt of the limited liability company or limited liability company C has been individually guaranteed, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, in full view of the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and the whole arguments, the defendant can only recognize the fact that the defendant, as the representative director of limited liability company C, borrowed the above company's KRW 100,000 from the plaintiff.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.