1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the facts of recognition are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination

A. The court's explanation of this part of the judgment on the cause of the claim is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of the first instance, and thus, citing this in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. On the grounds of the Defendants’ objection to the Defendants’ objection to the repayment, the Defendants asserted to the effect that Defendant B paid the entire payment in cash to the Plaintiff. 2) The fact that the creditor who lent the judgment amount falls under the case of the fact that the creditor who received the loan from the obligor and did not issue and deliver a receipt, etc. proving the repayment to the obligor, and without issuing a certificate, etc. proving the repayment, and the creditor holds the underlying document, such as the certificate of the loan. Thus, in order to recognize the repayment under such circumstance, the aforementioned special circumstance should be deliberated and determined by clearly stating the circumstance of the special group that could not recover the loan certificate, etc., or the fact that the receipt was not issued.

(See Supreme Court Decision 85Meu1213 delivered on November 12, 1985) In the instant case, there is no dispute between the parties that: (a) the health care unit; (b) the Plaintiff holds the remainder payment obligation of Defendant B; and (c) the loan certificate (Evidence A1) certifying the joint and several liability obligation of Defendant C; and (d) the Plaintiff did not issue and issue a receipt certifying the repayment obligation to Defendant B.

However, as a result of the examination of the evidence Nos. 1, 5, and 6 by the court of first instance on the defendant C by the court of first instance, the following circumstances, i.e., the Plaintiff did not receive the advance payment from the defendant B for a long period exceeding nine years.