1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff asserted on October 25, 2006 lent 15 million won to C on May 23, 2010 as the due date for repayment. Since the defendant, who was in a de facto marital relationship with C, guaranteed the debt of the borrowed amount or acquired the debt of the borrowed amount, the defendant is obligated to pay 15 million won and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

2. The following facts are recognized if the testimony of the concerned witness C is added to the evidence Nos. 1 and Nos. 1 to 6 and the testimony of the concerned witness C:

C around 2006, in order to provide security to the representative director of a company (which is not clear whether the company is D or E) which operates a new house construction or sale business (the company is not a corporation).

Around September 1, 2016, the Plaintiff, who was aware of the foregoing circumstances, took up with C, deducted KRW 60,000,000 from the monthly interest rate of KRW 60,000.

However, because F does not have a passbook at the time, C received only 5,400 remittances to the defendant's name passbook managed by C, and F was released and used by F.

In 2009, the plaintiff was found to have filed a fraudulent complaint with the Seocho Police Station in order to prevent the F from making investments or lending money due to the bankruptcy of the company which was the representative director.

At the time, the Plaintiff, at the time, in a de facto marital relationship with C and prepared a certificate of loan in the name of the Defendant having property, would withdraw the complaint. At the request of the Plaintiff, the Defendant drafted a certificate of loan (Evidence No. 1) stating “15 million won per day, repayment date, May 23, 2010, and October 25, 2006,” as “the date of borrowing,” at the request of the Plaintiff.

Nevertheless, the Plaintiff did not withdraw a complaint and C received a non-prosecution decision on July 20, 2009 (no suspicion) with respect to the case in which the Plaintiff filed a complaint.

In light of the developments leading up to the preparation of the above loan certificate, Gap evidence No. 1 alone borrowed KRW 15 million from the plaintiff on October 25, 2006.

As to the debt borrowed by the defendant or the defendant.