1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 28,421,761 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from September 18, 2014 to the day of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 24, 2006, the Defendant lent to the principal debtor B KRW 114,00,000 per annum as collateral 405 of the Busan-do building C, Busan-gu building 405, the ownership of which was 7.78% per annum, 19% per annum, 19% per annum, maturity, 23 October 2026, and repayment method under the condition that the principal and interest are equally divided every month after the lapse of five years from the date of loan. The Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the loan debt of the above B at KRW 148,20,00 as the maximum guarantee amount.

(hereinafter “instant loan agreement”). B.

As the Plaintiff lost the benefit of time due to the Plaintiff’s failure to perform his/her obligation under the above loan agreement, the Plaintiff received a decision to voluntarily commence the auction on May 1, 2008, and received dividends of KRW 238,063,658 from the date of distribution on May 15, 2009.

C. The interest that the Plaintiff had not recovered pursuant to the loan agreement of this case even after receiving the said dividends is KRW 28,421,761.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 2-9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant, as a joint and several surety of the instant loan agreement, is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 28,421,761 won interest under the said loan agreement and delay damages at the rate of 20% per annum from September 18, 2014 to the day of full payment following the delivery of the application for modification of the purport of the instant claim and the cause of the instant claim.

In regard to this, the defendant defense that the above claim under the loan agreement of this case was extinguished by the prescription period of five years after the expiration of the statute of limitations as commercial claim.

However, since the interruption of prescription against the principal obligor is also effective against the guarantor, the extinctive prescription of the joint and several surety claim under the loan agreement in this case is interrupted on May 1, 2008, at which the decision to commence voluntary auction was rendered, and the distribution schedule becomes final and conclusive, and the extinctive prescription is again run from the time when the said decision to commence voluntary auction became final and conclusive. However, the lawsuit in this case was filed before