1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 35,00,000 and 30% per annum from September 7, 2012 to March 20, 2014.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 23, 201, Defendant B entered into a lease agreement between Defendant C and Defendant C, setting the deposit amount of KRW 85,000,000 and the contract period of KRW 85,000 from July 15, 2011 to July 14, 2013, under which Defendant C entered into a lease agreement between Defendant C and Defendant C on the lease of KRW 201 (hereinafter “instant house”) from among the three-story detached houses located in Ansan-gu, Ansan-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City. From around that time, Defendant B had the fixed date applied for a move-in report at the same time as of April 23, 2012 while residing in the instant house and obtained the fixed date as to the instant house on April 24, 2012.

B. On May 7, 2012, Defendant B agreed to transfer 35,000,000 won interest (31.2% per annum for interest) from the Plaintiff, who is a credit service provider, to the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff in order to secure the repayment of the said borrowed amount as of August 6, 2012, and as of August 6, 2012, Defendant B agreed to transfer the above Defendant’s claim for the refund of the deposit to the Plaintiff.

C. On May 7, 2012, the Plaintiff issued and delivered a certificate of borrowed amount of KRW 35,000,000 from Defendant B, and demanded additional collateral. Accordingly, Defendant C stated his name and address, resident registration number in the column for joint and several liability on the said certificate of borrowed amount, and affixed his/her name and seal thereto, thereby indicating the intent of joint and several surety as to the Defendant B’s obligation to borrow money.

[Ground of recognition] Defendant B: Service by public notice (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act) Defendant C: Each entry in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including paper numbers), the inquiry results on F Resident's Center at Ansan-si in Ansan-si in this court's Ansan-si, the whole purport of the pleadings, and the whole purport of the pleadings. Meanwhile, the above Defendant defense to the effect that the above evidence Nos. 3 (written confirmation) and Nos. 4 (money borrowed) are not affixed with his seal on each of the above documentary evidence, and that the authenticity of the evidence is denied, taking into account the whole purport of the argument by G appraiser's automatic appraisal, it is identical with the above written confirmation of payment, and the fingerprint affixed with the borrowed money's fingerprint.