The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 300,000,000 and the Defendants from November 8, 2016 to Defendant A.

Facts of recognition

A. On October 5, 2010, Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) concluded a credit transaction agreement with the Industrial Bank of Korea on October 5, 201 to obtain a loan of KRW 400,000,000 on the expiration date of the credit, and the interest rate and compensation rate for delay determined at 11% per annum (hereinafter “instant credit transaction agreement”), and received a loan of KRW 400,000,000 from the Industrial Bank of Korea.

B. On January 3, 2013, Defendant B guaranteed the obligation owed by the Defendant Company to the Industrial Bank of Korea under the instant credit transaction agreement within the scope of KRW 480,000,000.

C. The Industrial Bank of Korea concluded with the Joint Asset Management Co., Ltd. on May 31, 2013, and on June 26, 2013, pursuant to the agreement on the transfer of the pertinent asset acquisition agreement entered into with the Federation and the Plaintiff, the Bank notified the Defendants of the transfer of the claim for loans under the instant credit transaction agreement that the Industrial Bank of Korea held with the Defendants. On June 27, 2013, the Bank notified the Defendants of the said transfer of the said claim, and thereafter, notified the Defendants of the said transfer of claim.

The Plaintiff filed an auction to exercise the security right against the land owned by Defendant Company D, and five parcels of land owned by Defendant Company C with the Incheon District Court, and received dividends of KRW 2,355,084,484, and appropriated the principal and interest of loans under the instant credit transaction agreement. Accordingly, on November 7, 2016, the interest and interest of loans under the instant credit transaction agreement remains at KRW 463,890,411 (i.e., principal and interest of KRW 400,000,000).

[Ground of recognition] A and evidence Nos. 1 through 7 [Defendant B denies the authenticity of a contract for continuing a loan after the representative office took office on November 2012, 201, which appears to have been directly prepared by Defendant B through a written objection, and the evidence No. 10 of the contract provides that “the termination of the security deposit following the settlement of the exchange for the current account” is “the termination of the contract.”