1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff holds a loan certificate stating that “The date of preparation is July 31, 2012,” and “C” with the borrower’s “C, but the interest rate of KRW 10,000 shall be 5% per month, and the due date shall be October 2012” (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”).

B. Meanwhile, the Defendant and C were legally married on June 3, 1973, which completed the marriage report, and the agreement was married on April 4, 2011.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On July 31, 2012, the Plaintiff received the instant loan certificate and lent KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant and C as the marriage fund.

B. Although the Defendant and C divorced on April 4, 2011, they continued to be in de facto marital relationship while living together with the Plaintiff until they borrowed the above money from the Plaintiff.

C. The defendant and C are jointly and severally liable for a common household obligation even between the couple in a de facto marital relationship. Since the defendant and C borrowed money from the plaintiff on the pretext of their marriage funds are about daily home affairs, the defendant are jointly and severally liable for C's loan obligations against the plaintiff as a person who was in a de facto marital relationship with C.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above loan amount of KRW 10,000,000 and damages for delay.

3. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the witness D’s testimony and the overall purport of the pleadings, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant and C had a de facto marital relationship at the time of preparing the instant loan certificate, since it was recognized that the Defendant continued living together with C even after the combination between C and C on April 4, 2011.

Furthermore, in preparing the loan certificate of this case, C is one of its children only by examining whether the funds borrowed by C, as alleged by the Plaintiff, with respect to daily home affairs, are described in subparagraphs 1 through 3 (including serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and 5.