1. The plaintiff's appeal and the first preliminary claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added the judgment of the first preliminary claim added by this court under paragraph (2) below, and thus, it is decided to accept it in accordance with the main sentence of

On the seven pages of the judgment of the first instance, the following shall be added:

【The Plaintiff testified in the court of first instance that Defendant B did not do this, and that Co-Defendant C of the first instance court stated in 201 that he first deemed in the court of first instance; 6 The Co-Defendant C of the first instance court testified that he was aware that he was a witness of the instant case, such as Seoul High Court 2014No1931, before the instant lawsuit was brought, and that he was aware that he was a H.

2. Judgment on the first preliminary claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion made a loan to Defendant B and Co-Defendant C in the first instance trial by remitting the instant payment amounting to KRW 159,500,000,000,000 on December 26, 200 at H’s request, and KRW 31,90,000 on January 31, 2008, and KRW 159,50,000 on April 16, 2008, from the account in the name of E to the account in the name of F. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the said loan amount of KRW 159,50,000 and damages for delay.

B. As alleged by the Plaintiff, there is no objective evidence to acknowledge that the lending contract of the instant payment was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B and the Co-Defendant C in the first instance trial, and rather, according to the Plaintiff’s statement at the court of first instance, the Plaintiff did not know at all Defendant B and the Co-Defendant C at the time when the instant payment was transferred, and only transferred the instant payment with H as it was later repaid.

The plaintiff's above assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's primary claim and each conjunctive claim are without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate. Thus, both the plaintiff's appeal and the first preliminary claim added by this court.