1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The reasons why the court should explain this part are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance except for the following parts or any additional parts, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(b) As for the part to be used in the first instance judgment, “Defendant B”, “Defendant B”, “Defendant C,” written in the second instance judgment, the second instance judgment, the second 14, 16, and the third 2, 19th , the third 2, 4, 7, and 11th , shall be deemed to be “Defendant”; the second 2, the second 2, 14, 18th , and the third 15th , shall be deemed to be “C”, respectively.

In the judgment of the court of first instance, "the loan of this case" (hereinafter "the loan of this case") and "the joint and several surety of this case") are deleted, and "the loan of this case was received" were added to "the loan of this case 90 million won and the defendant's joint and several surety of this case" in the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter "the loan of this case").

Article 3 of the Judgment of the first instance court, “Defendant C has filed an appeal, but “The Plaintiff has filed an appeal with the District Court 2012No1741,” and written “The Plaintiff has filed an appeal with the District Court 2012No1741.” The judgment of the first instance court 3, written “The Defendant C has re-appealed the appeal and is currently pending in the appellate trial.”

“The Defendant C appealed as follows: “The Defendant appealed (Korean Government District Court 2013No1704) and the final appeal (Supreme Court 2014No290), but all of which were dismissed and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

“”

2. Judgment on the defendant's main defense

A. Since the Defendant’s assertion received a favorable judgment in the case of an objection against the claim No. 2011 A. 27127 against the Plaintiff and the said judgment became final and conclusive, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it goes against the res judicata of the final and conclusive judgment.

B. The judgment of the Supreme Court No. 2011Gadan27127 is based on the premise that the joint and several surety of this case is valid.