1. Among the part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance, loans listed in the separate sheet Nos. 4 and 11, and the attached sheet.

Basic Facts

Around August 21, 2012, the Defendant entered into a business agreement (hereinafter “instant business agreement”) with the co-defendant C of the first instance trial (hereinafter “C”) to jointly establish the F Hospital (hereinafter “instant hospital”) which is scheduled to be established on September 1, 2012 from the second to seventh to the ground surface of the E-ground Building in Ansan-si, Ansan-si, the second to the fourth to the ground.

Under the instant partnership agreement, the Defendant received KRW 6 million per month from C by entrusting a hospital doctor and a medical doctor with a medical doctor and a medical doctor, and C is delegated by the Defendant with all expenses incurred in the operation of the hospital, all civil and criminal responsibilities, taxes, and rights to all revenues. However, all matters concerning the operation of the hospital shall be determined by mutual agreement between the Defendant and C, and C shall be determined by detailed explanation to the Defendant regarding the business relationship between the relevant parties, such as a pharmaceutical company, and C shall obtain consent from the Defendant at the time of accounting management.

On August 25, 2012, the Defendant and C leased the building portion to be used as the instant hospital under the name of the Defendant, and around September 1, 2012, the instant hospital was established under the name of the Defendant.

Upon receiving a request for a lending of money to be used as operating funds of the instant hospital, the Plaintiff transferred the money from the Plaintiff’s foreign exchange bank account to the Defendant’s account in the name of the Defendant used for the operation of the instant hospital, as indicated in the [Attachment] Nos. 1 to 3, 5, and 10 of the loan details No.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2-1, 2, and 14 (the defendant's assertion that the defendant's name was stolen by a third party while recognizing the stamp image next to the defendant's name, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, the whole document's authenticity is presumed to have been established), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2-1, 2-2, and 5-2, and the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole argument is the defendant's name upon request by the defendant and C.