1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that the defendant is obligated to pay the above amount to the plaintiff, since he lent 25,000,000 won to C under the defendant's joint and several guarantee.

According to the overall purport of the statement and arguments, Gap evidence 1-1-2 and Eul evidence 1-2, the plaintiff set out and lent 10,000,000 won on September 5, 201 to C under the defendant's joint and several sureties as of March 31, 201, and set and lent 15,000,000 on January 14, 201 as of July 31, 201; 10,50,000 won on December 8, 2010; 30,000,000,000 won on loans received from C or the defendant on December 28, 2010; 80,000,000 won on May 5, 20, 200,000 won on loans, and 30,005,00 won on the above loans, 10,000 won on May 30, 2012

Therefore, unless there are special circumstances, the defendant is liable to pay the remaining loan 21,500,000 won (=(10,000,000 won - 3,500,000 won)) to the plaintiff as a joint and several surety for the above loan obligation. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion is reasonable within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining arguments are without merit.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant alleged that he paid 12,410,000 won to the Plaintiff in addition to the above 3,50,000 won from December 15, 2010 to May 5, 2012, but it is not sufficient to recognize the above only by the descriptions in subparagraph 1-1 to 13, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.

B. As the Defendant, on September 18, 2014, erroneously remitted KRW 1,500,000 to the account of a national bank in E on September 18, 2014 to the Defendant, the said money should also be appropriated for the repayment of the remainder of the loan obligation.