배당이의
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation as to this case is as follows, and the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the part concerning the Defendants in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Parts used or added;
(a) On the 6th of the judgment of the first instance court, “B” is added to “each entry in the evidence No. 1 of the first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance judgment,” and “the results of each order to submit financial transaction information to new banks and the entire purport of arguments
B. Following the first instance court’s first instance court’s 6th page, “The fact of either issuance or issuance” was added to “the fact that the J has paid a certain monthly amount of money from March 2010 to Defendant B and his spouse W as interest payment.”
(c) at least 6 pages 15 of the judgment of the first instance court is all referred to as “the court of first instance”;
In Part 7 of the Decision of the first instance court, the phrase “for repayment of KRW 35 million” in Part 9 shall be read as “for repayment of KRW 35 million plus interest.”
(e) Each of the parts “not considered as false bonds” in the first instance judgment Nos. 9, 11, 12, and 11, 8 shall be followed as follows.
"The point that it is difficult to regard it as a monetary loan transaction with false bonds or no interest agreement."
F. Following the first instance court’s decision No. 18 of the 9th instance court’s decision, “and Defendant D and J frequently engaged in monetary transactions for investment in the O’s business in addition to monetary loan transactions.”
G. The following is added to the first instance court’s first instance judgment No. 20, which read “from one to another difficult to conclude”:
Although Defendant D stated that it was impossible to confirm the exact amount of claims at the time of the Notarial Deed prepared in 2013, the amount of claims asserted by Defendant D based on evidence submitted during the oral proceedings of this case is most.