1. As to KRW 1,323,509,738 among the Plaintiff and KRW 1,320,904,110 among the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall start from August 18, 2016 to September 4, 2016.

1. Comprehensively taking into account the respective descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers) and the overall purport of arguments as to the cause of the claim, each contract for guarantee insurance between the plaintiff and Eul Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "non-party Co., Ltd.") was jointly and severally guaranteed by the defendant. In each of the above guarantee insurance contract, "where the policyholder fails to perform the main contract with the insured and the plaintiff is to pay the insurance proceeds to the insured immediately, the policyholder and the joint guarantor agreed to pay the insurance proceeds to the plaintiff in addition to damages for delay (the applicable rate publicly notified by the plaintiff) if the plaintiff is delayed to pay the insurance proceeds to the insured," and thereafter, the non-party Co., Ltd. did not perform the main contract on August 5, 2016, the plaintiff paid the insured Co., Ltd. with KRW 1,210,904, KRW 110,000,000,000 per annum, the applicable rate of the plaintiff's disclosure is 160% per annum, 2016.816% per annum.

In this regard, in signing the documents on joint and several sureties, the defendant argued that the plaintiff's employee's "only if the plaintiff needs the guarantor due to the nature of the guarantee contract, he/she shall not be liable for the guarantor even if the occurrence of the insurance accident later. It is not clear about the occurrence of the insurance accident later, and only if he/she is signed, he/she shall be held liable for the guarantor. The defendant's false words, and the defendant caused the occurrence of the insurance accident in this case due to the mistake, and thus the guarantee of this case was cancelled by the delivery of the legal brief dated October 25, 2016. However, it is insufficient to recognize the above deceit only with the descriptions of Eul 1-1 and 2, and there is no other evidence

2. Conclusion, the defendant.