1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning the principal lawsuit shall be modified as follows.

Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation in this part is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance court (the “1. Basic Facts” of the suspension of the third page). Therefore, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

However, part of the first instance judgment shall be made as follows:

[Supplementary part] The 2-6 (g) of the first instance court's 7 pages of the 7th court's decision shall be followed as follows.

G. Meanwhile, on June 5, 2017, the Defendant Union filed a lawsuit claiming the payment of liquidated damages, etc. against M on the part of M (Seoul Eastern District Court 2017Gahap105416). On November 3, 2017, M filed a counterclaim (Seoul Eastern District Court 2017Gahap11107) against the Defendant Union to seek the payment of construction costs, etc. on the part of the Defendant Union. On January 17, 2019, the above court rendered a decision in lieu of the conciliation with the content that “the Defendant Union has a bankruptcy claim against M, and waiver of the rest of the claim against M’s counterclaim,” and the said decision became final and conclusive around that time.”

2. The court's reasoning for this part of the judgment on the principal claim is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (Article 8, "the judgment on the principal claim" in the part of the judgment of the court of first instance). Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

However, with respect to the defendants' repeated or new arguments at the trial, the following is applicable.

In addition, the judgment of the court of first instance is added, and part of the judgment of the court of first instance is:

As described in paragraph (1), it shall be done.

A. 1) Additional part 1) Determination as to the Defendants’ assertion that “the Plaintiff is not a loan, because it is the money of the nature to be borne by the Plaintiff)” is based on the summary of the Defendants’ assertion (1) each of the loans stated in each of the instant loan certificates is the workshop rental fee, electricity user fee, water user fee, pumps rental fee, law firm rental fee, attorney appointment fee, stamp fee, and service fee.