1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B: 270,000,000;

B. Defendant D Co., Ltd. is jointly and severally described in the preceding paragraph with Defendant B.

1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant B and Defendant D

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

(However, the part of Defendant C Co., Ltd. is excluded).

Articles 208(3)2 and 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act of each applicable provision of Acts (see Supreme Court Decision 208(3)2, 150(3)

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the manager of Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”), and Defendant C affixed the name of Defendant C and the corporate seal to the effect that Defendant C is jointly and severally and severally liable for the loan obligations of Defendant C against the Plaintiff.

Therefore, Defendant C, jointly and severally with Defendant B, who is the principal debtor, should pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 160 million guaranteed by Defendant C among the loan obligations owed by Defendant B, and interest for delay.

B. As to whether Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant C’s debt owed to the Plaintiff, the evidence Nos. 1, 3, 6, 8, 9, and 10 cannot be used as evidence because there is no evidence to prove the authenticity. ② The evidence Nos. 2, 4, 5, and 7 cannot be used as evidence; or the Plaintiff transferred money to Defendant B; or the Plaintiff concluded a monetary loan contract with Defendant B or Defendant D with a joint and several surety; thus, it is insufficient to recognize that Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation; ③ there is no evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant C cannot be accepted.

3. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s respective claims against Defendant B and Defendant D are accepted on the grounds of their reasoning, and the Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant C are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.