All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The exemption or discharge of an obligation does not necessarily necessarily mean that it is an express expression of intent, and if it can be seen that it is an exemption or discharge of an obligation by interpretation of any act or expression of intent by the obligee, it must be recognized.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da40505 Decided October 14, 2010, and Supreme Court Decision 2013Da7516 Decided May 9, 2013, etc.). Furthermore, in light of the overall purport of pleadings and the result of the examination of evidence, the court determines the fact-finding with free conviction in accordance with logical and empirical rules, based on the ideology of social justice and equity, taking into account the overall purport of pleadings and the result of the examination of evidence. As such, insofar as it does not exceed the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, the value judgment and fact-finding belong to the discretion of the fact-finding court, and the fact

(2) On February 2, 2010, the court below partially accepted the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim seeking the performance of the joint and several surety obligation, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. (1) A (hereinafter “A”) lent KRW 5 billion to F on August 7, 2009. On the same day, the Defendants recognized the joint and several surety obligation. Meanwhile, in full view of the facts in its judgment, A, at the time of the extension of the first loan period for the instant loan obligation, was implicitly exempted from the above joint and several surety obligation. (3) The court below dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim seeking the performance of the said joint and several surety obligation.

3. The purport of the grounds of appeal disputing such determination by the lower court is merely the selection of evidence and determination of the value of evidence belonging to the free trial of the fact-finding court, and the fact-finding based thereon.

In addition, while examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s fact-finding and judgment, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, waives the right or waives the implied right.