1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are dismissed, respectively.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff cited in the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the judgment of the court of first instance. The grounds for appeal by the court of first instance are those submitted additionally by the plaintiff in this court, and the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff lent KRW 253 million to the defendant is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff lent KRW 200 million to the defendant. The court of first instance rejected each statement in the evidence No. 19 and No. 22 (including the serial number). The following are the same as the statement in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the part which

2. Determination as to the conjunctive claim that the plaintiff added in this court

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the construction cost of an industrial complex was borne by the defendant in full. Since the plaintiff used all the construction cost of KRW 253 million borrowed from D for the construction cost, the defendant exempted the defendant from paying the construction cost to be borne by him, the defendant is liable to pay the above money as the indemnity to the plaintiff.

B. As to the plaintiff's conjunctive claim as above, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff's conjunctive claim as to the defendant's allegation of the method of attack on the actual time limit shall be dismissed as it constitutes an attack on the actual time limit, since the plaintiff's conjunctive claim had been newly asserted at the court of first instance, and thus delay the conclusion of litigation

The term "influence and defense" under Article 149 of the Civil Procedure Act means the means of attack and defense, which may delay the conclusion of litigation by either party by making an adequate time after the lapse of the pertinent time pursuant to the degree of litigation intentionally or by gross negligence.

In order to determine whether or not a new attack and defense method has been submitted late after the expiration of an appropriate time, the parties can expect to submit it in the past in view of the progress of specific litigation.