1. The part against Defendant C in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to that part shall be dismissed.

Defendant B, who requested the Plaintiff to lend money due to lack of construction cost on April 13, 2014, decided to lend KRW 5,000,000 to Defendant B with the maturity of May 2014. The fact that the said money was remitted to Defendant C’s account at the time of maturity of payment is not disputed, or that it was recognized by the purport of entry of evidence No. 1 and all pleadings. Thus, Defendant B is obligated to return the said loan to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

In regard to this, the above defendant agreed to settle the above loans to the extent that the above defendant paid on behalf of the above defendant and paid on behalf of the above defendant, as long as the above defendant paid on behalf of the above defendant 3,046,000 won of the company's goods payment obligation, the remaining loans are merely KRW 1,952,00, but there is not sufficient evidence to acknowledge the above loans merely based on the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge them. Thus, the above defense is rejected.

Therefore, the above Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from December 20, 2014 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the application for the instant payment order, as sought by the Plaintiff.

The part of the claim against Defendant C asserts that Defendant C is also obligated to return the above loan jointly and severally with Defendant C. Thus, the fact that the Plaintiff transferred KRW 5,00,000 to Defendant C’s account is as seen earlier. However, this is merely a mere fact that Defendant C used the account in the name of Defendant C in the process of lending the above money from the Plaintiff, and that the above Defendant borrowed the above money jointly and severally with Defendant B in the process of allowing the Plaintiff to use the account in its name.