1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant A’s KRW 189,725,441 and KRW 73,073,428 among them:

B. Defendant B is Defendant A.

Basic Facts

From December 28, 1995 to December 31, 2003, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement (hereinafter “each credit guarantee agreement of this case”) between Defendant A and Defendant A regarding the obligation to obtain a loan from a financial institution, as shown in the following table:

A wife B of Defendant A jointly and severally guaranteed all obligations owed by Defendant A to the Plaintiff according to the credit guarantee agreement concluded on December 31, 2003 among the credit guarantee agreements of this case.

In accordance with each credit guarantee agreement of this case, Defendant A was granted a loan from the National Agricultural Cooperative of Calone and Balone Livestock Cooperative as collateral, but a credit guarantee accident occurred due to overdue principal and interest due to overdue payment. Accordingly, the Plaintiff made a substitute payment as listed below.

CD EF GH on the other hand, according to each credit guarantee agreement of this case, when the plaintiff performed the guaranteed obligation under each of the credit guarantee agreements of this case on behalf of the above defendant on the part of the above defendant on the ground of the non-performance of the guaranteed obligation, the defendant A and his guarantor shall pay the amount of guarantee performance and the expenses incurred in the performance of the guaranteed obligation, the expenses incurred in the preservation, transfer and exercise of the right acquired through the performance of the guaranteed obligation, the expenses incurred in the preservation, transfer and exercise of the guaranteed obligation, the amount of damages for delay of the contract for the subrogated payment determined by the plaintiff on the part of the plaintiff on June 26, 2017, including damages for delay, penalty, etc. of the plaintiff on behalf of the plaintiff on the part of the plaintiff on the basis of

CD EF GH [based on recognition] did not dispute, Gap evidence 1 (if the purport of this court's request for appraisal of Busan document is added to the whole purport of the pleading, it is recognized that the signature part of defendant B is the same as the penology of defendant B, and thus the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to have been formed), Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 2, and the cause of the claim as a whole of the pleadings.