1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

In the first instance court, the Plaintiff selected the Defendant with a loan claim, and the Plaintiff filed a claim for the transfer of each ownership due to the waiver of the security right on April 9, 2018, or on September 28, 2018, for the cancellation of the sale security contract based on the service of the request for change of the purport of the claim and the request for change of the title of the owner. The first instance court accepted the claim for the transfer of ownership due to the waiver of the security right and the transfer of the title of the owner on April 9, 2018.

In regard to this, it is clear that the defendant appealed against the part of the claim for the loan against the defendant, and the appeal is filed. Therefore, the subject of the judgment by this court is limited to the plaintiff's loan claim.

The court's explanation of this case is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus cites this case as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(Other, the grounds alleged by the Defendant in the appeal do not differ significantly from the allegations in the first instance court, and even if all the evidence submitted in the first instance court were examined, the first instance court that rejected the Defendant’s argument and subsequently accepted the Plaintiff’s claim for the loan, thereby justifiable). The third part of the first instance judgment “(600,000 won per month)” in the third part of the third part of the third part of the first instance judgment (60,000 won per month as of the end of each month)

The following shall be added between the 3th sentence of the first instance judgment and the 20th sentence, and the 3th sentence of the 20th sentence "Ma" shall be added to "F."

E. Meanwhile, on April 30, 2016, the Defendant paid KRW 108 million to the Plaintiff, which was not paid until that time under the instant loan agreement. On the other hand, on April 30, 2016, the Defendant added “this court is obvious fact and fact,” following the first instance judgment No. 4 of the first instance judgment, i.e., “the fact that there is no dispute,” and “the first instance judgment No. 9 and 10.”