1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the part of the first instance court’s “1. Basic Facts”, except for adding the following to the last part of the second instance court’s “based grounds for recognition”. As such, this Court’s explanation is cited in accordance with the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In addition, the part to be added [the defendant alleged to the effect that the confession was revoked through the statement of reasons for appeal as of October 16, 2018 when he/she led to the confession that he/she had signed by himself/herself on the part of the defendant's name of the first instance court (Evidence A No. 1). The court shall allow revocation of the confession only in cases where the confession was proved by evidence that the confession was not in conformity with the truth and that the confession was deemed to have been caused by mistake in accordance with the purport of the oral argument (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da6367, Apr. 13, 2001). The court shall allow revocation of the confession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da6367, Apr. 13, 200

A. The court's explanation of this case concerning the plaintiff's claim is "2." of the judgment of the court of the first instance.

A. Since the part of the “judgment on the Plaintiff’s claim” is the same as the part of the “judgment on the Plaintiff’s claim, it shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of

B. As to the judgment of the defendant's assertion, the defendant's signing of the loan certificate of this case with the defendant was aimed at comprehensively arranging the relationship between the claim and the claim that existed before while the plaintiff decided to purchase the defendant's horse riding club ownership, which is the representative of the plaintiff, and since the horse riding club acquisition was no longer made, the defendant is not obliged to perform the obligation under the loan certificate of this case.

(2) Since the money stated in the loan certificate of this case is not the loan but the plaintiff's investment, the defendant does not have an obligation to return it, and ③ The GG is a tenant, who is the lessor.