A. Defendant (Appointed Party) and Appointed C shall be jointly and severally liable for KRW 62,00,000,000 and the two. < Amended by Act No. 15035, May 30, 2018>

A. The Defendant (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Defendant”) and the Appointor C operate a restaurant with the name of “D” between women. From November 201, the Defendant borrowed money from time to time to time to time to the Plaintiff for the operation of the restaurant. The loan certificate was drawn up seven times as follows:

(F) “The Plaintiff, etc. to whom the Plaintiff, etc. 10,000,000 (hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff, etc.”) on the date on which the Plaintiff, etc. 10,000,000 B of December 1, 2014 on the date on which the Plaintiff, etc. 1, 2015, 10,000 “the Plaintiff, etc. 10,000,000 on June 24, 2015” means “the Plaintiff, etc. 10,000 on July 25, 2015” means “the Plaintiff, etc. 20,000,000 on August 25, 2015, 20, 200,000 on the loan receipt issued on the date on which the Plaintiff, etc. 1, 200,000, 30,000 on July 10, 2014;

B. On March 17, 2018, the Defendant drafted a written confirmation to the Plaintiff that the unpaid loan amounted to KRW 62,000,000.

(A) No. 8, hereinafter referred to as “instant confirmation”). (c)

The Defendant subscribed to the No. 14,400,000 won in total as of December 31, 2018 (=1,200,000 won in total x 14 times) as the Plaintiff did not pay the said amount by December 31, 2018, while the Defendant joined the No. 1,200,000 won in each month.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 17, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the appointed parties C have transacted money for a long time, and there is a dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the amount of loan and the amount of repayment.

In a case where the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, the existence of a juristic act in its content must be recognized unless there are special circumstances to the contrary, even if the existence and content of the expression of intent indicated in the document are clear and acceptable. According to the above recognition, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff and the Defendant, while preparing the instant confirmation document, have determined a loan unpaid due to the money transaction at KRW 62,00,000.

The defendant's written confirmation of this case is threatened by the plaintiff.