1. The obligation under a joint and several surety contract concluded on November 26, 2013 between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. B entered into a loan agreement with the Defendants and received a loan

(hereinafter “each of the instant loans” (hereinafter “instant loans”). The parties’ “stock company” are omitted. On November 25, 2018, the Defendant’s contract date loan agreement (%) interest rate (%) overdue interest rate (%) overdue interest rate (%) on November 26, 2013, KRW 39 million 39 million on November 26, 2018, Nov. 25, 2018, KRW 39 million on November 26, 2013;

Each joint and several guarantee contract in the name of the plaintiff with respect to each of the loans of this case (hereinafter "each of the joint and several guarantee contracts of this case") is prepared.

The Defendants were provided with a copy of the Plaintiff’s driver’s license, a written confirmation of eligibility for health insurance, a health care insurance premium payment certificate, and credit card information (hereinafter “instant identification card”).

C. The Defendants contacted with the Plaintiff’s mobile phone, and confirmed their own signature and intent of joint and several sureties in each of the instant joint and several sureties contract from the responding party.

The Defendants recorded the confirmation details.

(hereinafter “each of the instant recordings”). The voice of the response parties to each of the instant recordings are the same.

The voice of the response seems to be different from the voice of the plaintiff.

On March 30, 2017, at the first date for pleading, Defendant 1, 2, and 3 had repeatedly expressed the voice of the man and the Plaintiff’s voice to five audience.

These are the same as the audience opinions.

-0 persons, different persons

one person, may be well known.

4 persons were four.

Among the audience, one of the audience re-convened, he/she repeatedly heard the voice subject to comparison, and the final opinion is the same.

-0 persons, different persons

three persons, may be well known.

2 persons were two.

Each recording of this case refers to the writing signature, and as seen later, the writing book clearly differs from the writing book of the plaintiff, and is written.