1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. On December 16, 2002, the Plaintiff leased KRW 10 million to C on December 16, 2002 at interest rate of KRW 36% per annum and due date of repayment on March 16, 2003. Accordingly, D and the Defendant’s joint and several liability guarantee are not in dispute between the parties or may be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement of evidence A No. 1.

Therefore, unless there are special circumstances, the defendant is a joint and several surety for the plaintiff, and the defendant is obligated to pay the above loan amount of KRW 10 million and interest or delay damages.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The Defendant’s defense of the defense that D, the actual obligor of the above borrowed loan, repaid the above borrowed loan debt, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this. Thus, this part of the Defendant’s defense is without merit.

B. The defendant, in violation of Article 103 of the Civil Code, borrowed money from D, the actual debtor of the above borrowed money, in order to run an entertainment business in which sexual traffic takes place. The plaintiff, knowing such circumstances, concluded the above loan loan contract with the knowledge, so the above loan contract has no effect, and therefore the said joint and several liability contract has no effect.

D solely based on the results of the examination of the defendant himself and the testimony of the witness C at the trial of the party, the above borrowed money was used as the funds for entertainment business.

It is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff entered into the above loan agreement with the knowledge of such circumstances, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it (In so doing, the Defendant is the person who paid all the prepaid money to the Defendant at the time of the above joint and several guarantee and used 2.85 million won out of the above borrowed money as his own cost of living), and the Defendant’s defense of this part is without merit.

C. The defendant's defense of the completion of the commercial statute of limitations is also defense that the above joint and several liability obligation has expired due to the completion of the commercial statute of limitations, so the entries of evidence Nos. 1, Nos. 2 and 3, the defendant's principal examination result and the trial court.