1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 100,000,00 and 5% per annum from January 15, 2011 to July 28, 2015.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the evidence evidence No. 1, Defendant Incorporated Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) borrowed KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff on January 14, 201 as of January 14, 201, and the Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant Company’s debt to the Plaintiff.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the loan amount of KRW 100 million and 5% per annum from January 15, 2011 to July 28, 2015, which is the delivery date of the instant complaint, 20% per annum from the next day to September 30, 2015, and 15% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment, barring special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. The Defendants: (a) the Plaintiff-friendly D was fully repaid the above loan, or D was provisionally registered in the factory building located in Sejong-si in lieu of the Plaintiff’s loan; (b) the Plaintiff’s claim for the loan was extinguished.

Doing that there is a risk of double payment due to the provisional registration of D or D.

B. However, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendants performed their obligations against the Plaintiff (the Defendants’ assertion was rejected by the Daejeon District Court on December 23, 2015), and insofar as it is not recognized that the obligations against the Plaintiff were extinguished due to repayment, the mere fact that provisional registration under the name of D exists, cannot prevent the Plaintiff from claiming the Plaintiff’s loan based on the disposal document. Thus, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remainder is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.