1. The Defendant is jointly and severally and severally with B and C about KRW 420,467,956 and KRW 100,950,930 among the Plaintiff and KRW 100,950,930.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Korea Technology Finance Corporation (the “Korea Technology Finance Corporation before its modification: hereinafter the “Korea Technology Finance Corporation”) filed a lawsuit against the Defendant and the joint guarantor D, B, and E as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2008Da254231, Oct. 30, 2008; Defendant, D, B, and E jointly and severally rendered the said judgment to the Korea Technology Finance Corporation as “148,452,45 won, 101,231,890 won, 25% per annum from May 26, 1998 to October 31, 1998; 20% per annum from the following day to February 29, 2000; 18% per annum from the next day to April 16, 200; and 10% per annum from the next day to October 16, 2008; and 10% per annum from the day to 20% per annum.”

B. On September 27, 2012, the Korea Technology Finance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Korea Technology Finance Corporation”) provides “the instant bonds.”

(C) On November 1, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred the instant claim to the Defendant, etc. by content-certified mail. As of August 24, 2018, the instant claim reaches KRW 100,950,930 of the principal amount, KRW 4,899,510 of the provisional payment, KRW 314,617,516 of the delay damages, and KRW 420,467,956 of the total amount of KRW 420,467.

2. Determination

A. The fact that the Plaintiff applied for the instant payment order on September 1, 2018, when the ten-year extinctive prescription period of the instant claim was imminent, is apparent in the record, and thus, the benefit of the instant lawsuit can be acknowledged as a re-instigation of suit for the interruption of extinctive prescription.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is jointly and severally liable with B and C (former E) to pay the money stated in paragraph (1) of this case to the plaintiff who acquired the claim of this case as requested by the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion is subject to the court’s decision on bankruptcy around 2010 by the representative liquidator D.