1. The part against Defendant B among the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff falling under the revoked part is against Defendant B.

Basic Facts

A. Defendant B: (a) on each date indicated below’s “date of lending” in the “date of lending” column of the following [Attachment 1], the respective amount indicated in the “amount of lending” column of the same Table was KRW 290,000,000; and (b) the interest rate stated in the “interest rate” column of the same Table and the due date was set at one month after the respective lending date.

Serial 1 2003-09-08 9 10,000,00 22003-12-15 925,000,000 3204-03-03 910,003-03 910,000, 204-04-06 910,0000 5 2004-04-204-2009 2004-204-209 920,000, 005-204-29 004-2910,000, 005-29 005-29 005,000, 20007 2004-205-205, 2004-9 90-10-10, 2008 200-90-104

B. As indicated in Table 2, Defendant C determined and lent to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 40,00,000 as the respective amount indicated in the “loan Amount” column for each date indicated in the “Loan Date” column for the same Table as indicated below, and the interest rate “interest rate” stated in the same Table as the respective interest rate stated in the same Table and the due date as one month after the respective lending date.

(2) The Plaintiff claimed that the Defendant C loaned the loan amount of KRW 30,00,00 from the Defendant C as the loan amount of KRW 40,00,00, the sum of KRW 40,000, which was 206-07-315,000, which was 10,000, which was 100,000, which was 206-315,000, which was 100, which was 206,000, which was 100,000, which was 40,000, which was 40,000, which was 206, 200,000, which was 400,000, which was 40,000, which was 40,000,000, which was 3,000,000,000,000.

The question of who borrowed the above amount is the subject of major dispute in the trial, and it is the premise of judgment on the scope of repayment of the loan or the issue of satisfaction of payment, etc. as seen later.