1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 200,000,000 as well as 30% per annum from February 25, 2013 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 19, 2013, the Plaintiff lent KRW 200 million to Defendant B 3% of interest per month and from January 25, 2013 to May 31, 2013 (hereinafter “instant loan”).

B. At the time of the above lending, Defendant B prepared a certificate of cash borrowed (Evidence A No. 1) and delivered to the Plaintiff the certificate of personal seal impression and a copy of Defendant C’s driver’s license to the Plaintiff, stating that “The obligor agrees to have the obligor’s spouse C with the obligation to repay the borrowed money and the interest upon the breach of the above matters or the non-performance of the obligation to repay the borrowed money” (hereinafter “the instant guarantee contract”) was affixed immediately next to the statement that “The Defendant C’s personal seal impression and

C. Defendant B does not pay not only the above loan principal but also the interest.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 5, purport of whole pleading

2. According to the facts of the above recognition as to the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff overdue interest and delay damages calculated at the rate of 30% per annum, calculated from February 25, 2013 to the date of full payment, as agreed upon by the Plaintiff, within the scope of the agreed interest rate of KRW 200 million and the Plaintiff’s claim against the said loan.

3. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. The gist of the parties’ assertion argues that, in the event that Defendant B’s nonperformance of the instant loan obligation, the Plaintiff entered into a guarantee agreement with Defendant C or the Defendant B representing the Defendant C at the time of the nonperformance of the instant loan obligation, and even if he did not have the right to enter into a guarantee agreement on behalf of the Defendant C, the Plaintiff asserts that Defendant B had the right to make a guarantee agreement on behalf of the Defendant C, or the right to make a guarantee agreement on behalf of the Defendant C, was established as an expression agent under Article 126 of the Civil Act with regard to the conclusion of the instant loan agreement and guarantee agreement, or as the basic right

As to this, Defendant C.