1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. "32.32." in paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court of first instance.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is to be cited by the court in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, as it is, in addition to adding the judgment of the court of first instance as follows, the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance.

The third 13th 13th 13th 2013th 201, “The defendant appealed against the objection and pending in the final appeal (Supreme Court Decision 2014Na83661).” The above final appeal was dismissed on September 15, 2015 and the judgment of the appellate court became final and conclusive on the same day.”

B. Next, the court of first instance rendered a ruling to fully accept the Plaintiff’s claim for loan of KRW 200 million against D on September 5, 2013, following the 9th 3rd class “the fact that the Plaintiff received KRW 60,000,000,” and added the Plaintiff’s favorable judgment (U.S. District Court 2014Na25013) to the effect that the Plaintiff distributes KRW 30,00,000 to the Plaintiff in a lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution of KRW 102 housing proceeds raised by the Plaintiff against the Defendant.” The court of first instance added the “date of closing the pleadings of this case” to the “date of closing the pleadings of this case as of September 15, 2015”

C. The first seven statements of first instance “However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the amount of the Plaintiff’s secured claim was actually repaid, other than KRW 60,000,00 as recognized in the above paragraph (1)” are as follows: “In addition to the payment amount of KRW 60,000,000 recognized in the above paragraph (1) and the Plaintiff’s secured claim amount of KRW 30,000,000, in addition to the amount of the Plaintiff’s secured claim amount of KRW 90,000,000, in addition to the payment amount of KRW 30,000,000, as recognized in the above paragraph (1), it is insufficient to acknowledge it solely with the statement in the evidence No. 20, and there is no other evidence to

There is a fact that the plaintiff granted the right of representation to conclude a mortgage contract to D during the 9th class and 10th class.