1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. From February 8, 2013 to March 14, 2013, the Plaintiff leased a total of KRW 80,000,000 to the Defendant and the Defendant’s wife C, and the Defendant is jointly and severally liable with C to pay the Plaintiff the said KRW 80,000,000 and the delay damages therefor.

(hereinafter “the first argument”). B.

C As the Defendant borrowed the above KRW 80,000,00 for daily life while maintaining the marital life with the Defendant, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable to repay the instant loan to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 832 of the Civil Act.

(hereinafter referred to as “the second assertion”). (c)

C At the time, there was a fundamental right of representation as the Defendant’s wife, and C borrowed the above KRW 80,000,000 for the use of the university’s tuition fees, living expenses, and funds for singing room operation, which are means of maintaining the livelihood of the child, and upon promising the Defendant to repay the above KRW 80,000,000 in exchange with the Plaintiff, C requested a grace period. As such, C had a justifiable reason to believe that the Plaintiff has the right to borrow the above KRW 80,00,000 on behalf of the Defendant.

Therefore, the expression representation under Article 126 of the Civil Code is established.

(hereinafter referred to as the “third assertion”). D.

The Defendant promised to repay the above KRW 80,000,000 in the currency of the Plaintiff and requested a grace period, and the Defendant was in custody of the above loan certificate without raising any objection despite receiving the loan certificate under the name of the Defendant who is the Plaintiff as the obligee from C, and thus, ratified C’s act of unauthorized Representation.

(hereinafter “the fourth argument”) 2. Judgment

A. On the first argument, we examine the first argument.

Considering the overall purport of Gap evidence No. 1-2, Gap evidence No. 3-1 through 4, and Gap evidence No. 4, C borrowed KRW 80,00,000 from February 8, 2013 to March 14, 2013 (hereinafter "the borrowed money of this case") from the plaintiff as its bank account and borrowed the borrowed money of KRW 80,00,00 from the plaintiff.