1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) A is about 19,285.

According to the purport of the whole arguments and arguments, Gap 2, 5 (It is recognized that the seal imprint affixed on the above loan certificate is based on the network E’s seal imprint), Eul 2, and Eul 2, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) is the husband of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant”); the Plaintiff B, and Eul’s father, who is the father of the Plaintiff, shall be the husband of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”); the Plaintiff’s husband, who is the husband of the Plaintiff B and C, shall settle the financial relationship between them on November 26, 2013, and deliver a loan certificate of KRW 45 million to the Defendant; the network E is the deceased on January 10, 2014.

Therefore, Plaintiff A is obligated to pay damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum from April 1, 2014 to the date following the delivery of a copy of the instant counterclaim, which the Defendant seeks, as well as KRW 12,857,142, respectively, and from April 1, 2014 to the date of full payment.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims seeking confirmation of the absence of the above loan obligation are without merit, and the defendant's counterclaim claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.