1. The Defendants jointly and severally pay 846,879,410 won to the Plaintiff.

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

3...

1. The following facts are deemed to have been led to the confession by Defendant C pursuant to Article 150(1) of the Civil Procedure Act between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the remainder of the Defendants may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, and No. 4.

The Plaintiff (former Mutual Savings Bank: hereinafter “instant church”) loaned KRW 1,500,000,000 (hereinafter “first loan”) to the Fols Association (hereinafter “instant church”) on April 24, 2009, and KRW 155,000,000 on August 4, 2010 (hereinafter “second loan”) on each of the following terms:

The subject: The date of an agreement for general loan: The interest rate on April 24, 2010 of loan 1, and August 4, 201 of loan 2: 10% per annum: 22% per annum per annum.

B. On April 24, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a joint and several surety agreement with the Defendants on the limited amount of KRW 2,100,000,000 with respect to the obligations of the instant church, and on August 4, 2010, the Defendant A entered into a joint and several surety agreement with the limited amount of KRW 217,00,000 with the limited amount of KRW 217,00.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The following circumstances are revealed in light of the evidence No. 1 of the judgment on the scope of the guaranteed obligation of Defendant B, C, D, and E, as well as the evidence No. 2 of the evidence No. 1 of the court below, namely, the letter of collateral guarantee written by the above Defendants on April 24, 2009 only stated “one-time guarantee” as “one-time guarantee,” but there is no specific statement as to whether the above Defendants bears the guaranteed obligation for any kind of transaction, and since the instant church received the first loan on the same day, it can be deemed as guaranteeing at least one-time guarantee, and as long as “one-time guarantee” is stated, each of the instant church’s obligations owed to the Plaintiff in the same kind of transaction as the first loan can be deemed as having been prepared with the intent to guarantee each of the obligations owed by the instant church to the Plaintiff. The first and second loans are the same as the “general loan.”