1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 16, 2005, the Defendants were awarded a contract for the construction of a main multi-purpose apartment on the land of Yangcheon-gu Seoul, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant construction”).

After the completion of the instant construction, registration of ownership preservation was completed on December 26, 2005 with respect to H apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. On July 2005, the Plaintiff received a request from Defendant B to lend KRW 60 million to be used as the construction cost of this case, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 60 million to Defendant B, who received as collateral a promissory note endorsed by Defendant B and Defendant C on July 18, 2005 the maturity of the issuance date, October 18, 2005, the maturity of the issuance date, October 18, 2005, and the place of payment, and a promissory note endorsed by Defendant B and Defendant C (hereinafter “the Promissory note of this case”) and a supply contract for the apartment of this case as to KRW 401.

C. On August 11, 2005, the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for new glass and steel construction among the instant construction works by the Defendants.

On the other hand, on April 5, 2006, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D seeking the payment of the amount of the Promissory Notes (Seoul Southern District Court 2006Da31386) based on the instant Promissory Notes, and won in the appellate proceedings due to D’s appeal (Seoul High Court 2007Na41302) on March 27, 2008, the Plaintiff paid KRW 60,000,000 to D until May 31, 2008. When D delays the payment of the said amount, the conciliation was concluded that “The payment shall be made by adding an amount at a rate of 20% per annum from June 1, 2008 to the date of full payment”.

E. The Plaintiff received KRW 22,979,575 (principal KRW 17,229,575, interest KRW 5,750,00) from D around July 31, 2007.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 60 million to D, and Defendant B endorsed to the Promissory Notes in this case to the effect that the said obligation against the Plaintiff was guaranteed.