1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 85 million with the Plaintiff, and Defendant B with respect thereto from May 17, 2016 to Defendant C, and Defendant C on May 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 27, 2010, Defendant B prepared a loan certificate as shown in the attached Form with the Plaintiff, and Defendant C signed it as the guarantor.

(hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”). B.

The land in Gwangju Mine-gu, a representative of Defendant B, was awarded a successful bid in the process of voluntary auction on June 14, 2001, and thereafter the ownership was changed on July 14, 2010.

[Reasons for Recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment on the cause of the claim, Defendant B borrowed KRW 35 million from the Plaintiff on July 27, 2010 from the due date, and Defendant C signed as the guarantor of the above loan obligation.

On the other hand, the above loan certificate states that Defendant B promised to pay 50 million won prior to that of the Plaintiff when the land D was sold in Gwangju Mine-gu, and the fact that Defendant C signed as the guarantor is recognized.

According to this, the loan certificate of this case appears to have been written on the paper of a funeral for convenience in paying the respective loan amount of KRW 35 million and KRW 50 million, and it is interpreted that Defendant C's guarantee act is about KRW 85 million in total.

Therefore, the Defendants jointly have a duty to jointly pay to the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 85 million and damages for delay calculated from May 17, 2016, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint, and Defendant C has a duty to pay from June 8, 2016, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint to the day of full payment (Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings) per annum from June 8, 2016 to the day of full payment.

3. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. The gist of the claim (1) is that Defendant B borrowed KRW 85 million from the Plaintiff as in the instant loan certificate, but as in the instant loan certificate, Defendant B additionally borrowed KRW 13 million in total thereafter, and as in March 31, 2010, the Defendant’s wife with a greater debt repayment capacity.