1. The Defendant’s KRW 44,785,667 and KRW 7,797,616 among them shall be from March 1, 2014 to August 31, 2015.

1. In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4 (including the case where there is a serial number) as to the cause of the claim, the facts in the separate sheet No. 1 and the changed cause of claim are recognized.

According to the facts found above, pursuant to a credit guarantee agreement concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter “the credit guarantee agreement of this case”), the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 4,785,667 won including the amount of subrogated payment, amount of KRW 7,797,616, amount of KRW 36,300,751, and additional guarantee fee of KRW 559,200, and amount of KRW 128,100, and the amount of subrogated payment of KRW 7,797,616 from March 1, 2014 to August 31, 2015, the agreed rate of KRW 12% per annum from the following day to August 31, 2015, and KRW 8% per annum from the next day to the date of delivery of the application for change of claim and cause of claim, and KRW 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

2. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserts that the apartment sale contract was rescinded between the Defendant and the Korea Land Trust with respect to the intermediate payment loan agreement subject to the instant credit guarantee agreement, and that the Plaintiff received an intermediate payment loan in the name of the Defendant from the Korea Land Trust, so the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant for reimbursement was extinguished.

However, the plaintiff only claims against the defendant for the remainder after deducting the amount collected from the defendant's cancellation of the apartment sale contract from the amount of indemnity under the credit guarantee agreement of this case, and the plaintiff's claim for indemnity against the defendant cannot be fully extinguished merely because some of the amount was recovered from the cancellation of the apartment sale contract of this case. Thus, the defendant's claim cannot be accepted.

3. The plaintiff's claim is justified and acceptable.