1. The part against C in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above part shall be revoked.

1. The primary argument - Judgment on the loan claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 of the parties' assertion that around August 25, 2008, the plaintiff lent KRW 100 million to the defendants who were in de facto marital relations at the time, and loaned KRW 500,000 per month as the daily living cost, and requested to borrow KRW 100,000,000 per month within the short period of time, and received a request to request the loan of KRW 100,000,000 from June 2

8. up to 25. The sum of KRW 100 million was remitted to the Defendants, thereby lending KRW 100 million to the Defendants.

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay KRW 100 million and damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

2) The Defendants asserted that they borrowed KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff transferred KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff to Defendant B is Nonparty D’s money, which was the former husband of the Plaintiff, and D proposed that Defendant C would have invested surplus funds, such as refined land store sales proceeds and fraternity payments, which it had been operated at the time when the Plaintiff was engaged in trade business and would have been engaged in trade business, and that it was remitted through the Plaintiff for the purpose of investment. B. The issue of the instant case is whether the Plaintiff was a loan of KRW 100 million, which the Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant B. The issue of this case is whether the Plaintiff was the loan amount of KRW 100,000,000 on June 25, 2008; KRW 10,000,000 on July 30, 2008; KRW 250,000,000,000 on August 18, 2008; or that there was no dispute between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff.