1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff and the defendants committed many monetary transactions from around 1991 to neighboring areas. The defendants, around April 4, 200, may recognize the fact that they jointly prepared a promissory note with face value of 14,50,000 won and payment at sight, which are stated in the plaintiff's face value of 14,50,000 won and payment at sight, against the plaintiff around April 4, 200.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. On August 31, 2009, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) the Plaintiff was not paid the instant loan by the Defendants; (b) the Plaintiff received KRW 130,000 from Defendant B on payment on August 31, 2009; and (c) the Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 14,370,000 (=14,50,000 - 130,000) and damages for delay thereof. (b) On the contrary, the Defendants paid the instant loan to the Plaintiff in full; and (c) the Defendants did not repay the instant loan to the Plaintiff

The Plaintiff asserts that the statute of limitations for the instant loans has expired.

B. Determination 1) Regarding the assertion that the obligor paid the money as a repayment of a specific obligation, the obligee recognizes the receipt by the obligee. However, in cases where the obligee asserts that it was appropriated for the repayment of another obligation, the obligee must assert that there was an agreement on the satisfaction of other claims and that there was an agreement on the appropriation of other claims, or that other claims are in the order of statutory appropriation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da108095, Jan. 23, 2014). 2), there was no dispute between the parties, and the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the overall purport of the pleadings as follows: