1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

The reasoning of the judgment of this court cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (excluding the part concerning co-defendant A of the court of first instance, for which separation by appeal is not made) except for the addition of the judgment of the defendant to the argument that the defendant emphasizes or adds in the court of first instance as set forth in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, it shall be cited including summary language pursuant to

Part 3, "Defendant A" in Part 3 is used as "Co-Defendant A of the first instance trial", and all of "Defendant A" shall be used as "A".

Part 7 12 "230/2483" shall be applied to "230/2483, but less than Won".

Part 8, "302,172,852" in Part 15 shall be added to "302,172,838 won".

The "this court" shall be added to "the first instance court" in the column of the grounds for recognition corresponding to 1 or 3 in the table of section 10.

Part 11 "Cancellation on January 5, 2016" in Part 3 shall be changed to "Cancellation on June 1, 2016".

Part 12 "Total 1,475,631,259 won" in Part 16 shall be added to "total 1,431,781,259 won."

The table from the lower end of the 12th surface to the upper end of the 13th surface shall be substituted by the following table:

The fact that there was no dispute over 1 X 80,000,000 ar 1X 1 X 80,000,000 ar 2 Y1,000,000 ar 3 G unions did not dispute over 601,304,876 of the first collateral security obligation of this case, as a result of the first instance court’s order to submit financial transaction information to G unions, that there was no dispute over the second collateral security obligation of this case 150,476,383,751,781,2594, Defendant B 50,000,000 for Defendant B 2, 3, aggregate 1,431,781, 259, the first collateral security obligation of this case and the second collateral security obligation of this case were added between the first instance court’s order to submit financial transaction information:

(B) According to the result of the court’s order to submit financial transaction information to the W Bank against the W Bank, it is recognized that the obligation A incurred to the W Bank at the time of the conclusion of the instant payment contract for the payment in substitutes was 52,850,000. The obligation is set forth below the list of the 13 upper part of the W Bank.