1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is as stated in Paragraph 1 of the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for the dismissal of part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment as follows. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

On February 3, 2009, the term "F 42,500,000, the Loan Bank of the guaranteed loan term of February 4, 2008 No. 142,50,000 of the guaranteed loan term of February 4, 2008, the letter "F 4, 2008.2. 5, 500,000, K 142,50,000 of the General Funds Loan of the Seoul Bank of Korea on January 21, 2009 shall be changed to "No. 8, 2014" as "No. 4, 2008," changed to "No. 5, 7, 2010" as "No. 8, 2014."

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Pursuant to Article 530-9(1) of the Commercial Act, obligations of the company established through the division or the merger after division, which are jointly and severally liable to the creditors of the company established through the division or the merger after division, arising prior to the effect of the division or the merger after division, but yet at the time of the division or the merger after division, shall include obligations which have not yet arrived at (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Da7321, Feb. 14, 2008). Furthermore, even though the company's division or the merger after division had not yet occurred prior to the effect of the division or the merger after division, the legal relationship which forms the basis of the establishment

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da71660, Dec. 23, 2010). B.

In light of the above facts in light of the above legal principles, the defendant is a company that combines the part of the Eul's electrical construction business in installments, barring special circumstances, with the plaintiff pursuant to Article 530-9 (1) of the Commercial Act, the total of KRW 174,919,665 in subrogation payment under each credit guarantee agreement of this case = 43,145,372 in subrogation payment under the first credit guarantee agreement of this case = penalty of KRW 107,580 in accordance with the second credit guarantee agreement of this case.