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. In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1, the defendant, on November 30, 1996, prepared and delivered to the plaintiff a loan certificate with a maturity of KRW 30 million and a loan certificate with a maturity of November 30, 1998 (hereinafter "the loan certificate of this case"), barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay KRW 30 million to the plaintiff according to the contents of the loan certificate of this case.

2. As to this, the Defendant asserts that the money stated in the loan certificate of this case was provided to the Plaintiff by the mother C, and that the Defendant transferred the apartment owned by the Defendant to C according to the agreement between the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the Defendant, by transferring the apartment owned by the Defendant to C, paid in kind the obligation based on the

According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 6-2, Eul evidence No. 1, and Eul evidence No. 1 in order to secure the claim based on the loan certificate of this case, the plaintiff completed the registration of establishment of a mortgage with the maximum debt amount of KRW 39,00,000 in his name with respect to the Busan Nam-gu D apartment, Busan, which is the defendant's ownership, for the purpose of securing the claim based on the loan certificate of this case. On Jan. 2005, the plaintiff agreed to transfer the above apartment to Eul in order to repay the defendant's debt to Eul. The plaintiff cancelled the registration of establishment of a mortgage of this apartment of this case, the defendant completed the registration of establishment of a mortgage of this apartment of this case on March 9, 205, and on April 7, 2005, the plaintiff completed the registration of establishment of a mortgage with respect to the above apartment of this case C in his name to pay the debt amount of KRW 45,00,000 with the settlement related to payment in kind.

However, C provided the Plaintiff with the money on the loan certificate of this case.

There is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant’s payment of the debt to the apartment owned by the Defendant includes the obligation based on the loan certificate of this case.

In addition, C will be transferred from the defendant the above apartment as the payment for its own claim.