1. The plaintiff's appeal and the supplementary selective claims in the trial are dismissed, respectively.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after the appeal are filed.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added the following "2. Additional determination" to the argument that the plaintiff had selected an alternative in the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be accepted by the main sentence of Article 420

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff may seek reimbursement of KRW 5.5 million by subrogation of the Defendant, based on the premise that the Plaintiff paid KRW 5.5 million to the Retail Financial Support Center on behalf of the Defendant.

B. According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 5-3 and Eul evidence Nos. 5-4, in relation to the Promissory Notes case No. 2007 tea659, the fact that Eul paid 500,000 won to the Retail Financial Loan Center Co., Ltd., and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff paid the above money.

(A) The Plaintiff’s assertion based on this premise is without merit. (A) It is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant had gained a certain interest due to the performance of D’s above payment.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance as to the loan claim is just in conclusion, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the plaintiff's appeal and the court of first instance as to the additional selective claim.