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. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows, except for the addition of “2. additional determination” to the Plaintiff’s assertion added by this court, and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. As a joint and several surety B of the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff in this case, around October 2013, which was after the Plaintiff’s bankruptcy and immunity decision, entered the Plaintiff in the application for bankruptcy and immunity as the guarantor of the above loan claim, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant should be deemed exempted from the obligation stated in the purport of the claim against the Defendant.

B. Article 567 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that "the immunity shall not affect the rights of a bankruptcy creditor against a debtor's guarantor or any other person who bears an obligation together with the debtor and any security provided for a bankruptcy creditor." This purport is that the debtor's immunity does not affect the debtor's liability for repayment and the security provided by a person who has pledged his/her property to secure another's obligation. Thus, the plaintiff's above reasons asserted by the plaintiff cannot be viewed as a discharge of the plaintiff's obligation for

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.