1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is partly modified as follows, and the Defendant’s assertion emphasizing or adding at the trial room is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the determination of addition under paragraph (2). Thus, this is cited pursuant to the main sentence of

The second 8 written evidence of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be "11 to 15", and "8 evidence" shall be "4, 8" respectively.

The second 12th 12 part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be located in the sixth story, and the third 2nd Ga shall be "G" to "G which is the husband of the C".

The third 14th 14th Sheet of the judgment of the court of first instance is "related to H investment of a stock company".

The fourth 8-Class 4 of the first instance judgment “K” shall be sealed into “K (K's wife)” and the following parts shall be added to the next 13-Class 13:

1) After the lapse of the year E, E had been sentenced to the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016Ga5156184 (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016Ga5156184) on the ground that it is difficult to recognize that the secured debt has been duly constituted with respect to the right to collateral security (debtor G, maximum debt amount of KRW 50 million) in the name of K as against J.

2) G was indicted as a crime of fraud with respect to KRW 50 million under Paragraph 1 of the instant Second Agreement, but was acquitted (Seoul Northern District Court 2017No1234).

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendant’s allegation that the first agreement of this case was made was not made due to the executor’s default, and the payment was not made due to the executor’s default.

In a situation where the Defendant cannot expect cash repayment from G, the Defendant entered into the second agreement of this case, and fulfilled all the obligation to pay KRW 150 million thereafter, and the Defendant has the authority to conduct auction based on the instant right to collateral security in accordance with the second agreement.

G did not recover promissory notes in the face value of KRW 345 million issued at the time of the establishment of the instant collateral security right at the time of the instant first and second agreements.