1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Summary of the parties' arguments and the issues thereof

A. On May 6, 2009, the Plaintiff, through her husband, lent KRW 150 million to the Defendant on May 6, 2009, through her husband, and paid KRW 137 million in addition to the expenses after deducting the interest accrued.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff received KRW 24 million interest on the above loan claim, and received KRW 38,646,985 as the dividend for the auction of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”).

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 74 million and delay damages for the remaining loans.

B) In addition to KRW 100,000,000, which was demanded by the Defendant to lend money from the Defendant, the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 37,00,000 to the Plaintiff. 2) Even if the borrower of the loan was D, the Defendant would guarantee the Plaintiff’s obligation to borrow money. As such, the Defendant, as the surety, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the loan, KRW 74,00,000,00 and damages for delay.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant introduced D to borrow money to the Plaintiff and C, and did not directly borrow money from the Plaintiff. Furthermore, the Defendant did not guarantee D’s obligation to borrow money.

C. In the instant case where the Plaintiff’s funds appear to have been paid to D through C and the Defendant, the issue is whether the borrower who is directly responsible for the Plaintiff’s obligations to D or not is the Defendant, and then whether the Defendant guaranteed the Defendant’s obligations if it is D.

2. recognised facts;

A. 1D, such as borrowing of money, etc., shall lend money to the defendant who is a certified judicial scrivener in order to prepare the balance of the proceeds from the sale of real estate awarded at the auction procedure of the Suwon District Court on April 2009.