1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 133,317,60, and the Defendant A Co., Ltd. with respect thereto from November 14, 2014, and Defendant B.

1. On April 28, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant Company A (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Company”) on the supply of goods, etc. equivalent to the amount of KRW 125,00,000, the amount of KRW 118,787,00 on May 10, 2014 and the amount of KRW 301,623,80 on June 25, 2014, and supplied goods, etc.

On July 3, 2014, the Defendant Company issued a promissory note of KRW 70,000,000 at face value, KRW 1,000 on August 14, 2014, and KRW 70,000 at face value, KRW 70,00,000 at face value, and KRW 1,00 on September 12, 2014 at the due date (hereinafter “each of the instant notes”) and delivered to the Plaintiff.

In the back page of each of the bills of this case, the signature of the defendant B, the representative director of the defendant company, is stated.

The Plaintiff received KRW 6,682,400 out of the total face value of each of the bills of this case from the Defendant Company.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1 through 26 (including each number in case where there is a virtual number), the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant Company, the issuer of each of the instant bills, is the issuer of the Promissory Notes, and the Defendant Company, as the drawee of the Promissory Notes (the Defendant B appears to have signed on the back page receipt column of each of the instant bills to endorsement in the meaning of guarantee on each of the instant bills). The Plaintiff, the holder of each of the instant bills, together with the bill, is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the day following the due date of each of the instant bills (the Defendant Company, from November 14, 2014, and from February 6, 2015 to the date of full payment).

B. The Defendants, at the time of the issuance of each of the instant notes, issued each of the instant notes with the belief that all the goods alleged by the Plaintiff were supplied. However, the Plaintiff issued them.