A. The plaintiff A and the plaintiff B are married, and the plaintiff A and the defendant are the motives of elementary schools.

D is the mother of the plaintiff A, and E are the mother of the defendant, which became known to each other as parents.

B. E filed a lawsuit seeking the return of loan under the Seoul District Court Decision 2002Gadan28928 on November 1, 2000 against D on the ground that it lent KRW 70 million to D on November 1, 2000, and received a favorable judgment from the above court on February 11, 2003, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on March 13, 2003.

C. Around November 2005, the Defendant filed a complaint against the Defendant on the grounds that the Plaintiffs interfered with the business by finding the Plaintiff’s hospital operated by Plaintiff B and resulting in the Plaintiff’s repayment of money and obstructing the treatment of patients. As to the case of interference with the business on November 30, 2006 at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, the Defendant was unable to receive the payment of KRW 70 million from the Defendant’s Seoul Central Prosecutors’ Office, on the ground that the Defendant was found to find the Plaintiff’s hospital to receive the payment, and that the Defendant was found to have taken into account the motive, such as the fact that the Plaintiff’s hospital was found to be the Plaintiff’s hospital.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence 1 to 3, 9, Eul evidence 11-1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The summary of the plaintiffs' assertion does not have borrowed KRW 70 million from the defendant around 1998, and there is no agreement that the plaintiffs Eul or the plaintiffs agreed to jointly take over the plaintiff Eul's obligations and the defendant's obligations jointly. Thus, there is no amount of KRW 80 million against the defendant of the plaintiff Eul based on the joint assumption of obligation with respect to the plaintiff Eul's obligations, or the amount of KRW 80 million against the defendant of the plaintiff Eul based on the joint assumption of obligation with respect to the above obligations, or the amount of KRW 80 million against the defendant of the plaintiff Eul based on the joint assumption of obligation with respect to the above obligations.

B. The plaintiffs bear the defendant's liability of KRW 80 million for the following reasons:

1 Plaintiff A borrowed KRW 70 million from the Defendant around 1998, and KRW 80 million including interest around January 2009.