1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The grounds for appeal by the Defendants cited in the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and the Defendants did not submit additional evidence in the court of first instance. Even if all the evidence submitted in the court of first instance are examined, fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are recognized as legitimate

Therefore, this court's reasoning is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following additions. Thus, this court's reasoning is cited in accordance with the main text of Article 420

2. Additional determination

A. The loan certificate of this case and the right to collateral security based on the Plaintiff’s assertion against the land of this case are merely false indications to prevent Defendant C from arbitrarily disposing of the land of this case, and the Plaintiff does not actually lend KRW 150 million to Defendant C.

Therefore, since the Defendants’ obligations based on the instant loan certificate do not exist, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.

B. Determination 1) Article 605 of the Civil Act provides that, in cases where both parties are liable to pay money, or any other substitute, not by a loan for consumption, if both parties agree to pay the subject matter as the object of a loan for consumption, the loan for consumption becomes effective if the parties agree to do so. In this case, according to the facts acknowledged earlier, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff is entitled to return KRW 150 million, while settling accounts with Defendant B, and that the Plaintiff formed a loan certificate of this case and completed the registration of establishment of a mortgage. Therefore, the agreement for a loan for consumption, which entered into on March 21, 2011, which entered into the loan certificate of this case with the settlement of accounts with Defendant B as the debt for the loan pursuant to the loan certificate of this case. 2) As long as the judgment document regarding the assertion of false declaration of intent as to the assertion of false declaration of intent is recognized as genuine, the court may deny the contents of the statement, and the existence and contents of its declaration of intent as stated therein