2. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 29,405,00 and Defendant B with regard thereto.

A. The Plaintiff’s mother, E, and Defendant B were married on August 13, 1992, but the judgment became final and conclusive on April 2016, 2016, on the grounds that the Defendant B and E were divorced from a divorce lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff against Defendant B (an Daegu Family Court Branch Branch of 23014dan2128 and Daegu Family Court of the appellate trial).

B. Defendant B established and substantially operates Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) and Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) for the purpose of soil work work business around July 2003. The F Co., Ltd. (former trade name: G Co., Ltd., May 2007; hereinafter “F”) for the purpose of engineering work business, building work business, etc. is also substantially operating.

C. On September 7, 2009, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 20,000,00 from H (hereinafter “H”) as interest fluctuation rate (5.58% of the publicly notified base interest rate, every three months, and the due date on September 7, 2010.

(hereinafter “instant loan”). Interest at around the lending date was KRW 158,00 per month (based on 30th day of each month) or KRW 163,00 (based on 31th day of each month).

On the date of the above loan, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 20,000,000 to the I Bank Account (J) in the name of the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “Amount of remittance of this case”). [Basic Facts] without dispute, entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff lent 20,000,000 won of the remittance amount of this case to the defendants, and the defendants jointly and severally as joint borrowers, and thus the plaintiff must pay 20,000,000 won and damages for delay. 2) The plaintiff's assertion by the defendants is that K has lent the remittance amount of this case to F which K had operated as representative director at the time of the transfer amount, and it is not a loan to the defendants.

B. The facts examined in the above basic facts of the claim against Defendant B, and the overall purport of the evidence and the pleading as seen earlier, can be acknowledged as follows.