1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

The reasoning for the court's explanation of this case is as follows: (a) the defendant is the representative director in the form of B and the actual operator of B's debt to the plaintiff; (b) the third part "131.377.232 won" in the first part "131,37,232 won"; and (c) the fourth part "decision on the argument of false conspiracy" in the second part "1" is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (d) it is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. [In order to invalidate the joint and several surety contract of this case, the part used for it is insufficient for the defendant to be the representative director in the form of B and to be the actual operator; and (e) the plaintiff and the defendant are not liable for legal liability under the joint and several surety contract between the plaintiff and the defendant.

However, according to the testimony of the witness D of the first instance trial, it is difficult to believe that C actually operated, according to the testimony of the witness D of the first instance trial, the above facts alone are insufficient to recognize that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant that he would not hold the legal liability of the joint and several surety contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

In conclusion, the decision of the first instance court is justifiable, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.