1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 2 through 5, the plaintiff set the interest rate of KRW 11.9% per annum on May 23, 2014, 11.9% per annum on an overdue interest rate, 25% per annum on a loan period, 36 months on an equal basis, and 25.9% per annum on an overdue interest rate, 25.9% per annum on an overdue interest rate, 25% per annum on an overdue interest rate, 36 months on a loan period, and 46 months, respectively. The defendant as the representative of B at the time, provided the above loans £« 47.46% per annum on an overdue interest rate, 36% per annum on an overdue interest rate, 47.5% per annum on an overdue interest rate of KRW 465% £« 675% per annum on a loan from January 10, 2016, ＋ 3197, 47.8 won and 7.44444 won.

According to the above facts, the defendant, a joint guarantor of B, is jointly and severally liable with B to pay to the plaintiff 31,971,695 won in aggregate of the principal and interest of each of the above loans and 31,157,131 won in aggregate of losses and overdue lease fees under each of the above loan agreements [1.33,243,391 won in addition to the loan section 23,243,879 won (=20,706,879 won + 2,536,512 won) + 2,913,740 won in loan section 7,913,740 won (= 7,06,547 won + 847,193 won) + from March 11, 2016 to the date of full payment].

2. The defendant's assertion argues that the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim of this case because he was registered as the representative of Eul, who is the actual operator of Eul, and became a joint and several surety for each of the above loan contracts.

Domins, B No. 1.