1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant A and jointly with C Co., Ltd. 53,767,320 won and its related amount from November 12, 2004 to November 12, 2004

1. The allegations and judgment of the parties

(a)as shown in the reasons for the attachment of the claim;

(However, the creditor's "the plaintiff and the debtor" are deemed to be the defendant, and the payment order for the debtor C corporation has become final and conclusive).

1) As to the Defendants’ assertion, the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2004Gahap106928 decided Feb. 1, 2004 (hereinafter “Seoul Central District Court Decision”)

(2) In the case of Seoul High Court 2006Na21561 (Seoul High Court 2006Na21561), which is the appellate court of the previous judgment, the fact that the judgment against C, which is the principal debtor, became final and conclusive on December 6, 2016, has no dispute between the parties.

3) The interruption of prescription, which occurred upon filing a lawsuit against the principal obligor, shall also be effective to the Defendants, a joint and several sureties (Article 440 of the Civil Act). Since the interruption of prescription shall continue to exist as far as the exercise of the right through the progress of litigation proceedings is maintained, in a case where the prescription of the principal obligation has been interrupted upon a judicial claim, it is reasonable to deem that the prescription period of the guaranteed obligation also runs again from the time when the judgment on the principal obligation became final and conclusive (see Article 178(2) of the Civil Act). Therefore, joint and several sureties claims against the Defendants, as well as joint and several sureties, shall resume from the time when the judgment on the appellate court against the said principal obligor C became final and conclusive, and ten years have passed thereafter. As such, the Defendant’s defense of the extinctive prescription period was rejected as long as

The defendants asserts that the statute of limitations on the joint and several liability obligations of the defendants shall run from the date when the judgment of the previous court became final and conclusive, on August 24, 2006, Supreme Court Decision 2004Da26287, 26294.

However, the above judgment is a joint and several surety obligation due to the final judgment between the creditor and the principal obligor.