1. The judgment of the first instance on the principal lawsuit is modified as follows. A.

The defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff, the appointed party) and the appointed party.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning the instant case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420

(A) In full view of all the arguments and the evidence presented by the court, the first instance judgment is reasonable). The reasoning of the first instance judgment does not exceed “Defendants” as “Defendants and Appointed A” (excluding the part on the table below No. 4), “Defendant A” as “Appointed A,” and “Defendant B” as “Defendants”, respectively.

In the fourth part of the judgment of the first instance, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, "Defendant G" in the item of "principal debtor/joint guarantor", "H", and "Defendants" shall be amended to "G", "N", and "Defendant A", respectively.

Then, the part 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance, “I am able to recognize” in the part 10 of the judgment of the court of first instance, “(the plaintiff and the defendant continue to dispute about the propriety of the above 65% even in this court, but even if all the allegations and evidence submitted by the plaintiff and the defendant up to this court are reviewed, the above 65% is deemed reasonable. Meanwhile, although the defendant asserts that the above appraisal value is too higher than the market price and thus it is unreasonable to calculate the amount of damages based on it, the evidence submitted alone cannot be deemed to have been erroneous

Then, the part 8 of the first instance judgment stating that “No ground exists” was added to the part 17 of the first instance judgment, “(the Defendant, in this court, added the argument that “The Plaintiff transferred the right to collateral security No. 2 as above, and the transferee brought the instant lawsuit to the Plaintiff by means of the trust of lawsuit, and the instant lawsuit is null and void due to the violation of the mandatory law.” However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff transferred the right to collateral security No. 2 as seen earlier. Accordingly,

The judgment of the court of first instance is written.