1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant B and C’s jointly and severally KRW 108,752,614 and KRW 105,224,006 among them, Defendant B and C shall be from March 15, 2019.

In full view of the purport of the entire arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, the facts of the cause of the change in the annexed sheet can be acknowledged. As such, defendant B and Eul jointly and severally are liable to pay to the plaintiff the principal and interest of 108,752,614 won and damages for delay in the principal amount of 105,224,006 won, and the defendant B and D jointly and severally are liable to pay damages for delay in the principal amount of 112,587,828 won and the principal amount of 106,561,968 won.

As to this, the defendant C argues that if a credit remains after the disposal of the real estate in B, which is the principal debtor, the principal debtor, shall demand the guarantor to pay the credit.

On the other hand, when the creditor claims the guarantor to perform the obligation, the guarantor may prove the fact that the debtor has the ability to perform the obligation, and the execution of the obligation is easy, and first claim against the principal debtor and the execution of the property is to be carried out. However, according to the evidence Nos. 437 of the Civil Act (see Article 437 of the Civil Act), the guarantor does not bear the obligation jointly with the principal debtor (see the loan transaction guarantee), and according to the evidence No. 3 of the same Act, the defendant C can recognize the fact that the debtor jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation of the defendant B, which is the principal debtor.

Therefore, Defendant B and C are jointly and severally liable to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from March 15, 2019 to the date of full payment. Defendant B and D are jointly and severally liable to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 112,587,828 won and 106,561,968 won per annum from March 15, 2019 to the date of full payment.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified, and all of them are accepted, and it is so decided as per Disposition.