1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant B and C’s joint and several KRW 139,809,333 and its KRW 80,000,000 among them, Defendant B and C shall be jointly and severally liable for the payment of KRW 139,809,3

1. The cause of the claim shall be as shown in the attached Form;

【Defendant B and C, based on recognition: Defendant D and E deemed a confession: The absence of dispute, Gap 1 through 3, the purport of the entire pleadings】

2. Determination on Defendant D and E’s assertion

A. According to Article 6 of the Special Act on the Protection of Surety, a guarantee must specify the maximum amount of the guaranteed debt in writing, and there is no guarantee agreement that does not specify the maximum amount of the debt in writing. Since Defendant D did not specify in writing the maximum amount of the debt at the time of the guarantee, Defendant D’s guarantee is null and void. Defendant D’s guarantee is deemed to be an auditor of Defendant D Co., Ltd., and Defendant D had already withdrawn at the time of entering into each of the instant insurance contracts. As such, the Plaintiff could not file a claim against Defendant D based on each of the instant insurance contracts.

3) The transaction agreements with F are also made with G as a guarantor, and G was excluded from the guarantor. However, since F did not inform the Defendant D of such fact, the guarantee of Defendant D is null and void (Defendant E also claims to the same effect).

4) Since the Plaintiff did not notify the Defendant D of the renewal of each of the instant insurance contracts every year, the Plaintiff’s claim is unreasonable.

(5) The plaintiff's claim is unjust (the defendant Eul also claims to the same purport) since there is another security, such as real estate security, against the plaintiff's claim.

6) Each of the instant insurance contracts is a performance guarantee insurance contract, and Defendant D bears the guaranteed obligation against F and H.

However, it is difficult to view the insurer under a guarantee insurance contract as a joint guarantor in the same position as the guarantor under a principal contract, and therefore, the insurer under an insurance contract cannot exercise the right of indemnity against the defendant D, the guarantor under a principal contract, in accordance with the Civil Act on the right of indemnity between joint guarantors

Defendant E also.