1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, and this case is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the judgment, except for partial revision as follows.

At the bottom of the second half of the judgment of the court of first instance, the phrase “the above 2013Kadan50349” shall be amended to read “the High Government District Court 2013Kadan50349”, and the phrase “the defendant” at the bottom of the same section shall be amended to read “C”.

Part 3, 3, and 4 of the decision of the first instance shall be amended as follows.

“The appeal against C was dismissed on September 18, 2015 (Seoul High Court 2015Na2023725), but the subsequent appeal by C was dismissed on November 24, 2015 (Supreme Court 2015Da238932). The foregoing judgment became final and conclusive on November 24, 2015 (see Supreme Court 2015Da238932).” On 4th 6th 1st 6th of the first instance judgment of “the entry of Category A1 through 6-3” is amended to “the entry of Category A1, 2, 6, and 7 (including the number of pages),” respectively, to “the results of each order to submit financial transaction information to the Korean bank of the first instance court and the Han Bank”.

4. 8.9 of the first instance court's decision shall be deleted "in accordance with the final judgment of the lawsuit claiming the collection of the money."

The defendant's 6 pages 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be changed to "C", and the defendant's "litigation claim or final and conclusive judgment on him/her" in the 9th sentence shall be changed to "final and conclusive judgment on C", respectively.

The following shall be added between five pages 11 and 12 of the judgment of the first instance:

“The Defendant also lent the real estate sale proceeds, etc. owned by the Defendant to C, and C entered into the instant sales contract and mortgage contract with the Defendant for the repayment of the said loan. Therefore, it is argued that himself is a bona fide beneficiary, but it is difficult to recognize the Defendant’s assertion only by the statement of the evidence No. 14, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.”

2. Conclusion, the plaintiff.