1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 100,000,000 for the Plaintiff and 12% per annum from October 1, 2017 to December 12, 2017; and (b) the Plaintiff.

1. On February 29, 2016, the Plaintiff lent KRW 100 million interest to C on a monthly basis (12% per annum) and on April 21, 2016 on the same day, which was determined as the maturity date. On the same day, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff provided joint and several sureties with respect to the obligation to borrow funds to the Plaintiff on the same day, either there is no dispute between the parties, or by taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement in subparagraph 1.

Meanwhile, C paid a total of KRW 19 million interest (i.e., KRW 2 million from May 2016 to December 2017) (i.e., KRW 2 million from July 2016, KRW 200,000,000 around July 2016, KRW 2016,000,000 around KRW 10,000,000 around December 2017; and accordingly, interest was paid for 19 months from the date of loan to September 30, 2017.

Therefore, as a joint and several surety for C’s loan obligations, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of KRW 100 million per annum from October 1, 2017 to December 12, 2017, which is the delivery date of the instant payment order, 12% per annum, and 15% per annum from the following day to the date of full payment.

2. As to this, the defendant asserted that "a claim for the repayment of a loan to the defendant is unjust in the situation where C, the principal debtor, is satisfied." However, the defendant's joint and several sureties, which is not a simple guarantee as to the loan debt of C, is identical as seen above. According to the proviso of Article 437 of the Civil Code, the joint and several sureties has the right of defense of the highest search warranting "the first claim to the principal debtor and the execution of the property shall be executed on the property." Thus,

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.