A. On September 3, 2008, the Defendant reported marriage with D on September 3, 2008. From October 201 to February 2012, the Defendant has been in charge of changing the status of stay to those who enter China from the administrative agency office to February 2, 2012.

B. On August 2010, Plaintiff A came to know of the Defendant’s entry into Korea and came to know of the recruitment of those who enter Korea upon Defendant’s recommendation, and Plaintiff B, who performed the same work, became aware.

C. On March 23, 201, the Defendant prepared a loan certificate of KRW 60,000 received from each Plaintiff B on March 23, 201, and issued it to Plaintiff B.

On May 26, 2011, the Defendant prepared and delivered a certificate of borrowing 100,000 bills from the Plaintiff.

E. On August 6, 2012, the Defendant received KRW 101,000 from Plaintiff B, and would return the said money if not by September.

“The” has drawn up and issued a certificate of borrowing.

F. Both the plaintiffs and the defendant are the nationality of the People's Republic of China.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the judgment on the defense prior to the merits and the decision on the governing law of this case are as follows: (a) the "decision on the defense prior to the merits of this case" of Section 15 of Section 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance, "A.A. assertion" of Section 16, "A.A. assertion" of Section 16, "B." of Section 21, "Decision" of Section 21, and "Determination on the governing law" of Section 5.11, "Determination on the governing law" of Section 5, and "Determination on the merits prior to the merits of Section 3." of Section 10 of the judgment of first instance are as follows, except for the deletion of "Determination on the merits prior to the merits of this case" of Section 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, and therefore, they are cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

3. Determination as to Plaintiff A’s claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion of the parties A did not repay it even though the defendant borrowed 100,000 bills from the plaintiff A.