1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. On April 10, 2019, C drafted a loan certificate stating that “A shall borrow KRW 12,00,000 from the Plaintiff as of January 6, 2020 with the maturity of payment, and interest shall be KRW 500,000 each month from May 6, 2019 (Evidence 1; hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”) to the Plaintiff.”

B. The Plaintiff paid KRW 11,00,000 to C at the time of the preparation of the above loan certificate, and transferred KRW 1,00,000 to the Defendant’s name account ( NonghyupD; hereinafter “instant account”) on April 18, 2019.

C. From May 2019 to November 201, 2019, the amount of KRW 500,000 per month was transferred to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. As the Plaintiff’s assertion and C jointly borrow KRW 12,00,000,000 from the Plaintiff while engaging in a business related to construction materials, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the said money.

B. The defendant's assertion that C requested to allow the use of the instant account by requesting C to allow C to use the said account, and there is no fact that C borrowed money from the plaintiff.

3. The following circumstances acknowledged as above and the statement of Gap evidence No. 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings are as follows, namely, that only C is written in the debtor column of the loan certificate of this case, that is, the defendant and C are stated in the loaner column of Gap evidence No. 2, but the defendant and C are unclear, the signature and seal of the defendant and C are not indicated, and that the plaintiff deposited part of the loan money in the account of this case and the money assumed as interest was transferred to the plaintiff. However, the possibility that C was used with the above account from the defendant and the defendant and C did not submit objective materials that the defendant and C engaged in the business related to building materials. Thus, the evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone cannot be ruled out.