1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

3.(a)

judgment of the first instance.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 10, 2014, the Plaintiff granted a loan of KRW 52.5 million to Defendant B by determining the due date of April 8, 2020, the interest rate of KRW 6.9% per annum, and the principal and interest method of repayment as equal.

B. As to the above loan, D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) jointly and severally guaranteed Defendant B’s obligation, D changed its organization into Defendant C’s organization (hereinafter “Defendant C organization”) on October 22, 2015 and dissolved.

C. Defendant B did not pay equal repayment of the principal and interest of the loan, and lost the benefit of September 10, 2019.

As of January 14, 2020, the sum of the principal and interest of Defendant B’s unpaid loan amounting to KRW 11,382,261, the balance of the principal and interest of the loan amounting to KRW 10,050,350, and the overdue interest rate under the above loan agreement is KRW 9.9% per annum.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 5, 2 and 6

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 11,382,261 as the principal and interest of the loan and KRW 10,050,350 as the balance of the principal and interest of the loan, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 9.9% per annum under the above loan agreement from January 14, 2020 to the date of full payment.

B. Defendant C’s organization asserts that the Plaintiff did not raise any objection at the time of changing from D to Defendant C’s organization, so the Defendant C’s organization is not a party to the contract, but its responsibility has ceased to exist under the above loan agreement.

However, if there is no dispute between the parties or when the purport of the entire argument is added, D is recognized that it did not notify the Plaintiff of the fact that it did not individually raise an objection to the Plaintiff, other than the publication of the examination, despite being aware of the Plaintiff

This is not in compliance with the procedure of restructuring stipulated in Articles 604 and 232 of the Commercial Code.

However, according to Article 60-2 (1) of the Framework Act on Cooperatives, a stock company may change its organization to a cooperative under the above Act, but in such cases, the existing stock company and the cooperative whose organization has been changed.