1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff lent money to the Defendant and C, who is the husband and wife, over several times from March 2016, and partly repaid money. On May 6, 2017, the Plaintiff confirmed the Defendant and C’s remaining loans. On the same day, the Plaintiff and C received each loan certificate of KRW 20 million from the Defendant and C with respect to the remaining loans of KRW 30 million, and the Defendant and C paid KRW 3.4 million among them.

Therefore, as a joint debtor or joint guarantor, the defendant is jointly and severally liable with C to pay the remaining debt amount of KRW 26.6 million and damages for delay.

B. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion does not have borrowed money from the Plaintiff or prepared each of the above loans, and each of the above loans is written by C at will without knowledge of it.

2. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff is only the above loan certificates in the name of the Defendant and C (No. 1, No. 2). Since the Defendant denies each of the above documentary evidence, in order to recognize the Plaintiff’s claim, the authenticity of establishment as to each of the above documentary evidence should be acknowledged.

In light of the Plaintiff’s argument, the following facts are as follows: (a) even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff demanded C to have the guarantor during the process of confirming the loan from the Defendant; (b) C had consented to the guarantee of the Defendant; and (c) each of the above loan certificate was prepared by C with the same body of notes including the Defendant’s name; (c) each of the above loan certificate is deemed to have been written by C; (d) the name of the Defendant and C was written by stating the name of the Defendant and the seal affixed on each of the above loan certificates, but unlike C, the name of the Defendant appears to have been written by the Defendant.