1. The Defendant’s KRW 308,000,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from May 26, 2016 to January 18, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 5, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with C to sell for KRW 900,000,000 the purchase price of KRW 1-1 of the underground floor among the fourth-story buildings D in Mapo-si (hereinafter “instant building”) among the four-story buildings D in Mapo-si (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

B. At the time of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff and C were to receive KRW 560,00,000, total of KRW 30,000,000 for the secured debt of the right to collateral security and KRW 590,000 for the lease deposit of the instant building, which was established on the instant building at the time of the instant sales contract, and KRW 310,000,000 for the remainder after deducting the above KRW 590,000,00 for the purchase price (= KRW 900,000,000 for - KRW 590,000,000 for the purchase price).

C. The Defendant, on November 11, 2015, issued his certificate of personal seal impression (Evidence A 3), and the Plaintiff asserted that on December 15, 2015, the Plaintiff issued the above certificate of personal seal impression directly from the Defendant or C, while the Plaintiff asserted that C had received the above certificate of personal seal impression from the Defendant and delivered it to the Plaintiff.

In this case, since the identity of the person who issued the above certificate of personal seal impression was not clearly identified, it shall be stated as above.

was issued.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The fact that the admissibility of evidence No. 2 (Joint Guarantee) exists or the seal of the above joint and several sureties is based on the defendant's seal imprint design is presumed to have been established as a whole due to the lack of dispute between the parties.

The defendant defense that C voluntarily prepared and sealed the above joint and several guarantee form without specific delegation from the defendant. However, it is difficult to acknowledge each of the above documentary evidence Nos. 1 through 4 by itself, and each of the above documentary evidence is a non-prosecution decision, etc. on the case that the plaintiff raised a complaint against the defendant for fraud, etc., without the delegation of the defendant by C at will.