1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the Plaintiff (Appointed) and the Defendant who falls under the following order of payment.

1. The reasoning for this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant

A. Article 760(3) of the Civil Act provides that an aided person or an assistant shall be deemed a collaborative act, thereby imposing liability as a joint tortfeasor on an aided person or an assistant. Aiding and abetting refers to all direct or indirect acts facilitating a tort, and includes not only a case of commission but also a case of facilitating the commission of a tortfeasor due to omission by a person liable for an act, who does not take various measures to prevent it. Unlike the Criminal Act, interpretation of the Civil Act, which recognizes negligence as a matter of principle for the purpose of compensating for damages, is able to assist and abetting a tort by negligence. In this case, the content of negligence refers to a violation of this duty on the premise that the aided person has a duty of care not to assist a tort. In order to hold the aided person liable as a joint tortfeasor, there is a proximate causal relation between the aiding and abetting act and the tort by the

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da78336 Decided June 14, 2007, and Supreme Court Decision 2008Da81657 Decided May 14, 2009, etc.) B.

As seen earlier, the Defendant was the representative director of the J company. Since the Promissory Notes in this case was issued by the Defendant, the representative director of the J company, with the Defendant as the addressee, but K was issued with respect to its obligations to J company, the Defendant delegated G with the authority to file a lawsuit and file a compulsory execution against the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the remaining designated parties in the name of the Defendant, the right or legal relationship asserted under the Defendant’s name, such as whether the Promissory Notes were forged, shall be factual and legal grounds.