1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s lawsuit against the defendants and the defendant Eul-appellant E shall be dismissed.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Selected E are siblingsed, and Defendant B is the mother of Defendant C (title F before the name of the former) and D is the husband of Defendant B and the father of Defendant C.

B. The Appointor E filed a lawsuit against the Defendants as the Daejeon District Court 2014Kadan18916 against the Plaintiff, G, the Plaintiff’s son, and the Defendants.

The claims by the Appointor E and G in the above lawsuit are as follows: (a) on June 11, 2010, the Plaintiff: (b) written a certificate of loan stating that “D and Defendant B would provide the Plaintiff with a certificate of loan amount of KRW 40 million on the face of the week; and (c) on June 11, 2010, the Plaintiff would provide a certificate of loan amount of KRW 41,80,000 (hereinafter “the certificate of loan in this case”; and (d) although D and Defendant B did not actually lend money, they did not actually have any obligation of the loan amount based on the certificate of loan in this case.

C. On June 26, 2014, the foregoing court dismissed the suit against the Defendants of “G” and the suit against Defendant E by the Appointor E against the Defendants of “G on July 17, 2014.” The Appointor E’s claim against Defendant C was dismissed. The judgment was dismissed.

The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(hereinafter referred to as the above final and conclusive judgment is referred to as the "final and conclusive judgment".

The main reason for the final and conclusive judgment in a prior suit is “The obligor E, and the obligee is the Defendant C who has acquired the claim for the loan of this case. As such, G’s lawsuit against the Defendant B is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

In light of the evidence submitted in the above lawsuit and the settlement details between the plaintiff and the defendants, it is recognized that the plaintiff and the defendant Eul prepared a certificate of borrowed money of this case stating the remaining 41.8 million won of the balance remaining after the settlement of borrowed money on June 11, 2010. Thus, there is no obligation to borrow money of this case.