1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a Korean legal entity that runs a shipping agency business, combined freight forwarding business, marine transportation brokerage business, etc., and the Defendant is a Chinese legal entity that runs marine transportation business, etc., and is the owner of a vessel indicated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant vessel”).

B. On February 8, 2018, C (hereinafter referred to as “Nonindicted Company”) drafted a letter of payment (Evidence A No. 4) with the Plaintiff. The said letter of payment states that “The amount to be paid by the Nonindicted Company that occurred until February 6, 2018 is USD 130,965.78.”

C. The letter of guarantee (No. 5) written by the Defendant as a titleholder exists, and the letter of guarantee contains a stamp image of the Defendant’s name, and the main contents indicated in the above letter of guarantee are as follows:

Under the following, “Ishee” refers to the Defendant, and “Ishee” refers to the Plaintiff.

1. The shot shall be the owner of the ship on a D case;

C. Ascertainment that SINGAPRE is liable to pay for USD 161,376.36 on behalf of the Corporation the amount which is not paid to you.

The due date of payment shall be the same as before the departure of Incheon Port after the termination of the seafarer’s benefit arrears case in Incheon and the completion of the loading and unloading on or around March 13-15. By that date, you agree that if the amount of USD 161,723.36 in full is not remitted to the earer by the due date, you shall not leave the ear (E), and you may provisionally attach the main vessel, and if necessary, you shall sell the main vessel by auction on behalf of the Lowest and shall secure the ear’s claims after the auction processing of the main vessel.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 5, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. On March 2018, the Plaintiff’s summary of the assertion was prepared by the Defendant, which acknowledged that the Defendant was liable to pay USD 161,376.36 to the Plaintiff (Evidence 5) to the first policeman.

However, the Plaintiff.