1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. The grounds for this part of the reasoning are stated in the relevant column of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for those written by the court, as follows:

(The main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act). Defendant D’s “Defendant D” of the judgment of the first instance is composed of “D”, “Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) and “Defendant B” of the third 7 to 8th 8th , both of which are “B”.

The fourth 10 to 11th 11 of the judgment of the first instance court shall be determined as “the payment was made, and Defendant C and E did not notify the Plaintiff at the time of the execution of the above loan.”

The attached Form 13 of the 5th judgment of the first instance court shall be in attached Form 1, and the "Defendant D" shall be in attached Form 1, and the "Defendant D" shall be in attached Form 1, respectively.

The 5th half to 6th half of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be cut down as follows.

(p) On July 23, 2019, Defendant E was subject to a disposition for lack of evidence as to the fraud and occupational breach of trust listed in attached Table 2 by the public prosecutor of the Dong Office of Busan District Public Prosecutor’s Office on February 20, 2018. The Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s married G were subject to a disposition for lack of evidence against the charge of perjury listed in attached Table 3 by the public prosecutor of the Dong Office of Busan District Public Prosecutor’s Office on July 23, 2019. [Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute, and Party E was not subject to a disposition for lack of evidence against the charge of perjury listed in attached Table 3. The records and videos listed in each of subparagraphs 1 through 5, 58 through 61, 69, Eul’s evidence Nos. 7, 8, Eul’s evidence Nos. 7, 8, and 1 through 3, 5, and 6

(i) the purpose of the entire pleadings;

2. Determination as to claims against the Defendants

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The defendant E actively participated in the illegal acts related to D's loan execution and withdrawal of loan, and in particular, the amount of KRW 80 million out of D's withdrawal was withdrawn due to the defendant E's failure to grant a loan to the defendant Eul if he did not pay the card price and the interest on the loan delay to the defendant Eul.

Accordingly, Defendant E executes a loan to the Plaintiff at the request of D, and D.