1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: Gap evidence submitted in the court of first instance, which is insufficient to recognize that the defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the debt of the defendant at the time of the agreement of this case, or the plaintiff written the phrase "joint and several" on the loan certificate of this case with the defendant's consent; and Gap evidence No. 6, which is insufficient to recognize that the defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the debt of the defendant at the time of the agreement of this case, is added to the defendant's new argument at the trial of the court of first instance, and thus, it

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. Even if the Defendant asserted that he had not jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation of the Plaintiff at the time of the instant agreement, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and C entered into the instant agreement on January 9, 2013 by additionally borrowing KRW 25 million from the Plaintiff. The Defendant concluded that the security value of KRW 10,810 square meters of forests and fields D and KRW 1,716 square meters before E (hereinafter “instant real estate”). In the event that C did not repay the loan by February 28, 2013, it would complete the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on the instant real estate in accordance with the instant agreement.

However, the defendant and C did not pay to the plaintiff by the due date stipulated in the agreement of this case, but the defendant did not complete the registration of the establishment of the establishment of the neighboring real estate of this case. Rather, on July 18, 2013, the third party was first completed the registration of the establishment of the establishment of the establishment of the neighboring real estate of this case. The defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff the amount equivalent to 65 million won borrowed money and damages for delay as compensation for the tort by deceiving the plaintiff or the non-performance of the obligation of the establishment of the neighboring real estate under the agreement

B. In full view of the evidence, evidence, evidence Nos. 9, 10, 11, and evidence Nos. 14 and 15 as seen earlier, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the real estate of this case is assessed as the security value of the third financial right at the time of the agreement of this case.