1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's primary claim against the defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 8, 2015, the Plaintiff, a credit service provider, received an application for a loan through a loan broker to the effect that “B wishes to obtain a loan by setting the loan interest rate of eight million won from the Plaintiff at 34.9% per annum, and the Defendant is a joint and several surety.”

B. The Plaintiff’s employees confirmed that B and the Defendant’s personal information provision consent, the Defendant’s resident registration certificate, the Defendant’s health insurance qualification certificate, and the Defendant’s health care insurance premium payment certificate, including the loan transaction agreement and joint and several guarantee contract in which B and the Defendant’s name are written as joint and several guarantors.

C. On April 10, 2015, the Plaintiff’s employee sent a telephone call for the loan examination with the Defendant. The Defendant, upon informing the Plaintiff’s employee of the Plaintiff’s resident registration number, cooperateed in the process of identification, and responded to the following: “B is the person who has resided in Dong Dong Dongdong, and the Defendant is residing in the apartment house that was concluded in the name of the Defendant with his family, and the Defendant is currently serving in C division of the members of the car parts agent company, and sending the joint and several guarantee contract and the credit information written consent in writing and by facsimile.” The Plaintiff asked the Defendant whether he/she wishes to stand as a joint and several surety.

On April 10, 2015, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 8 million to B on April 10, 2015, 34.9% per annum, and on April 10, 2020 on the expiration date of the contract.

E. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff again requested the Defendant to prepare a joint and several surety contract, but the Defendant refused to prepare a contract on the ground that he/she only responded to telephone conversations with the guidance of the lending broker and did not intend to guarantee.

F. The body of the defendant's name stated in the column for joint and several sureties of the above joint and several sureties contract is different from the body of the complaint prepared and submitted by the defendant (Evidence B No. 12).