1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B’s transfer on February 27, 2013 to the motor vehicles listed in the separate sheet.

1. The grounds for the plaintiff's claim are as shown in the annexed sheet.

2. Determination:

A. Each entry in the evidence No. 1 to No. 5 against Defendant B and the Co., Ltd. may be recognized by integrating the whole purport of the pleading.

B. According to the evidence evidence No. 1 of the part against Defendant D, the lease contract of this case jointly and severally guaranteed by the above Defendant is concluded by setting the lease period as 36 months from the date of the contract.

Thus, the lease contract of this case jointly and severally guaranteed by the above defendant is terminated on February 27, 201 after the lapse of 36 months from February 28, 2008, which is the date of the contract. The obligation of the plaintiff to pay is due to the failure to pay public charges, administrative fines, penalties, etc. imposed by the principal debtor while using the instant motor vehicle after the termination of the contract.

Therefore, Defendant D is not liable for this.

The Plaintiff asserts that, as a joint and several surety guaranteed for a definite debt of which the obligation is specified, the above Defendant is liable for the obligation after the termination of the contract, on the ground that even if the performance period for the guaranteed obligation is extended without his/her consent, the obligation should be borne by the joint and several surety. However, since the instant obligation does not constitute a conclusive obligation arising within the lease period, there is no room to apply

3. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B and C shall be accepted with merit, and the claim against the defendant D shall be dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.