1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation with the purpose of manufacturing and selling construction materials, and D Co., Ltd. (the representative E; hereinafter “D”) is a corporation with the purpose of gas facility construction, etc.

B. From August 29, 2013 to December 11, 2013, the Plaintiff supplied gas pipes equivalent to KRW 179,665,640 in D, and agreed to pay goods by the end of the month following the month of supply.

C. D paid the Plaintiff KRW 65,239,788, and KRW 20,00,000 on January 29, 2014, respectively, from October 7, 2013 to January 24, 2014.

On January 31, 2015, the Defendant respectively remitted KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff under the name of the F Company, the Defendant’s representative, and KRW 18,000,000,00 in the name of the Defendant from December 30, 2016 to April 27, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On February 17, 2016, the Plaintiff’s assertion made an oral agreement with the Plaintiff’s representative director G and telephone calls to jointly and severally guarantee the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay for the above goods. Around February 17, 2016, the Defendant transferred part of the amount to the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff to perform the joint and several liability. The remaining principal and interest of D’s obligation to pay for the said goods to the Plaintiff after deducting the goods paid by D and the Defendant is KRW 86,073,829 as indicated in the separate sheet of principal and interest

Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay 86,073,829 won and damages for delay which are jointly and severally guaranteed to the plaintiff.

B. The defendant's assertion that there is no joint and several surety for the plaintiff's goods payment obligation against D, and even if the defendant made an oral agreement to provide joint and several surety, such agreement is invalid as it violates Article 428-2 (1) of the Civil Act, unless the intent of guarantee is expressed in writing.

3. Determination

A. In addition to the entry of evidence No. 7, the Defendant’s entire purport of the pleading. The Plaintiff on February 17, 2016.