1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff and the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in Paragraph 2 below, since it is the same as the reasoning of the first instance court's decision in addition to the addition or dismissal as stated in Paragraph 2 below. Thus, it shall accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. The addition or dismissal of the part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be in the name of "the name of the plaintiff" in Part 3, 19, of the judgment of the court of first instance.

In the 5th sentence of the first instance court, the term "loan KRW 200 million" in the 6th sentence shall be "loan KRW 130 million".

Part 8 of the decision of the first instance court from 20 to 10 of the decision of the first instance shall be as follows.

3. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. On May 12, 2009, the plaintiff asserted that the defendant Eul borrowed a loan of KRW 200 million from May 12, 2009 with the defendant Eul, or jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan of the defendant Eul, and thus, the defendant Eul has a duty to pay the above loan of the defendant Eul jointly with the defendant Eul, and the defendant Eul did not have been involved in the monetary transaction between the plaintiff and the defendant Eul on behalf of the defendant Eul. 2) The above evidence, Gap's evidence, Eul's evidence, Eul's evidence, Eul's evidence, Eul's evidence, Eul's statement, Eul's evidence Nos. 27 and Eul's evidence No. 11, and the purport of oral argument as a whole were examined as follows. (1) At the time of May 12, 2009, the defendant Eul maintained de facto marital and economic relations with the defendant Eul, while it was in the form of a cash loan or an economic community, and the defendant Eul's account was not deposited with the plaintiff's bank's account No. 25.