A. Examining the following facts and circumstances as to the cause of the claim: (a) the parties did not dispute; and (b) the entry of the evidence No. 1, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the entire purport of the pleadings, the following facts and circumstances can be confirmed by Defendant B’s agreement that Defendant B agreed to the Plaintiff for the purpose of a loan for consumption on or around April 199 for all obligations, including the rent and the advance reimbursement obligation that Defendant B has to pay up to the time.

① Around April 1999, Defendant B prepared a loan certificate (Evidence A 1) stating that “I will borrow KRW 150,000,000 from the Plaintiff” (Evidence A) and presented it to the Plaintiff.

② From April 199, Defendant B leased one of the three-story buildings owned by the Plaintiff and operated a restaurant in the name of “G” for about 10 years until April 199, the two parties agreed to terminate the lease agreement, and it is difficult to find that Defendant B paid the lease deposit or monthly rent to the Plaintiff during the lease agreement period. Thus, the rent unpaid by Defendant B appears to be included in the amount stated in the above loan certificate.

③ The Plaintiff guaranteed the Defendant B’s obligation of loans to the agricultural cooperatives located in H, his mother, and the Plaintiff was faced with the situation that around April 1999, the Plaintiff would discharge its guaranteed obligation.

(F) On December 29, 199, the Plaintiff paid the total amount of Defendant B’s loans to the Agricultural Cooperatives (36,688,721 won and H’s loans worth KRW 15,781,767).

As to Defendant B’s defenses, etc., Defendant B asserted that the Plaintiff demanded the Plaintiff to present his spouse and prepared a loan certificate, but it is merely a mere fact that the above quasi-loan contract was concluded in collusion with the Plaintiff and Defendant B without the intent to bear the obligation and thus constitutes a false declaration of conspiracy.