1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 100 million and 5% per annum from January 7, 2010 to October 10, 2014.

1. On April 6, 2009, the plaintiff agreed to additionally receive 100 million won (hereinafter "the proceeds of this case") other than the above loans (hereinafter "the above loans of this case") from the defendant Eul Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "the defendant Co., Ltd.") upon setting the due date on May 6, 2009 and lending KRW 100 million to the defendant Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "the defendant Co., Ltd.") around April 6, 2009. The fact that the defendant C and D jointly and severally guaranteed the loans of this case and the proceeds of this case against the plaintiff of the defendant Co., Ltd. on the same date is not in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of arguments as to Gap Co. 1 (including the serial number). According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the loan of this case and the damages for delay to the plaintiff, unless there are any special circumstances.

2. Determination as to Defendant D’s assertion

A. Defendant D’s assertion as to the expiration of the statute of limitations as to the instant loan claim. As such, it is clear that Defendant D’s assertion that the instant loan claim has expired, and that Defendant D’s borrowing of the instant loan from Plaintiff as a merchant (Article 5(2) of the Commercial Act) constitutes commercial activity (Articles 47 and 64 of the Commercial Act). The statute of limitations is five years (Articles 3 and 64 of the Commercial Act). As seen earlier, the fact that the due date for repayment of the instant loan claim was May 6, 2009 is the same as indicated above. It is evident that the instant lawsuit was filed on August 21, 2014, which was five years after the said lawsuit was filed.

On the other hand, in full view of the purport of the entire arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 5 through 7 (including additional numbers), it is recognized that the defendant company prepared to the plaintiff on November 1, 2009 a loan certificate with the purport of repaying the total amount of KRW 200 million by November 30, 2009, and paid KRW 3 million as damages for delay with respect to the loan of this case on May 19, 201.