1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to enter the loan Nos. 5,1 million won as the loan No. 50,000 won = 12 million won as of Sep. 30, 2010 as of Sep. 30, 2010 with the loan No. 3 million won as of Nov. 30, 2010 with the loan No. 3 million won as of Nov. 30, 2010 with the signature No. 3 million won as of Nov. 30, 201 with the loan No. 3 million won as of Nov. 30, 2010 with the signature No. 3 million won as of Nov. 30, 201 with the signature No. 300,000 won as of Dec. 31, 2010.

(2) On May 30, 2018, C is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of KRW 24 million per annum under the Civil Act from June 8, 2018, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint in this case, to the Plaintiff, and at the same time, notification of the assignment of claims was reached. Thus, C is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act until September 5, 2019, which is the day when the decision was rendered by the court of first instance, to the effect that the Defendant’s objection is reasonable as to the existence or scope of the obligation.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant asserts that C is not obligated to pay KRW 51 million as stated in the loan certificate of this case, since C's intimidation or other coercion is prepared in the event that C fails to pay part of the loan amount.

However, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant prepared the instant loan certificate by the coercion C, and rather, it is against Party A’s 5, 21, and 21.