1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 2 and 3 of the judgment on the cause of the claim and the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff lent KRW 5,000,000 to C on May 2, 2014 on July 5, 2016, and the payment date of interest was fixed and lent on July 5, 2016, and on the 5th day of each month (hereinafter “the instant loan obligation”), and at that time, the Defendant’s joint and several guarantee for the instant loan obligation against C by the Plaintiff.

According to the above facts, the defendant, as a joint and several surety, has a duty to pay the plaintiff the principal of the loan debt of this case and the damages for delay from July 6, 2016, which is the day following the due date, as requested by the plaintiff, as a joint and several surety, except in extenuating circumstances.

B. The Defendant’s assertion and judgment asserts that C, the primary debtor, repaid the Plaintiff the principal and interest of the instant loan debt amounting to KRW 4,000,000 on July 5, 2016, and KRW 2,000,000 on July 6, 2016, thereby having extinguished the entire amount of the instant loan debt.

As to this, the Plaintiff asserted that, inasmuch as the Plaintiff’s obligation, other than the instant loan, against the Plaintiff, was repaid KRW 6,000,000 to the Plaintiff under a monetary loan agreement of KRW 15,00,000 on December 29, 2015, the total amount of KRW 6,000,000, which became due first according to the order of statutory appropriation performance, was appropriated for the repayment of part of the principal and interest of the obligation as of December 29, 2015, and is not appropriated for the repayment of the instant loan obligation.

Therefore, according to the overall purport of the statements and arguments in the health account, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and Eul evidence No. 2, and Eul evidence No. 1, 2000,000, and Eul remitted to the plaintiff's account on July 5, 2016, the sum of KRW 6,000,000 on July 6, 2016. However, at the time when Eul remitted the above KRW 6,00,00,000 to the plaintiff, the obligation under the monetary loan agreement of KRW 15,000 on December 29, 2015 as well as the obligation under the monetary loan agreement of KRW 15,00,00.