1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's action of subrogation by obligee added by this court shall be dismissed.

3.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same part of the judgment of the court of first instance as that of the defendant, except for adding the judgment on the creditor subrogation claim as set forth in paragraph (2) below, and thus, it is citing it as it is by the main text of Article 420

2. Judgment on the creditor subrogation claim

A. The money lent by the Plaintiff to the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was used as the down payment for the sales contract between H, the landowner of the five parcels outside Suwon-gu G in Suwon-si and E, the executor of the instant construction, as the down payment.

However, due to the cancellation of the above sales contract, E was returned to the Defendant, and E has the right to claim the return of the down payment against the Defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff seek 200 million won and damages for delay against the defendant by subrogation of E.

B. In a judgment obligee’s lawsuit, where the obligee’s right to the obligor is not recognized by subrogation, the obligee becomes the Plaintiff himself/herself and the obligor’s right to the third obligor is no longer entitled to exercise the obligee’s right to the third obligor, and thus, the subrogation lawsuit is unlawful and dismissed.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Da53205 Decided September 4, 2014, etc.). The Plaintiff asserted to the effect that, inasmuch as 200 million won he/she lent was used as the down payment for the land he/she purchased from H, the Plaintiff has the loan claim of KRW 200 million against E, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff has the loan claim of KRW 200 million against E.

The plaintiff asserted from the complaint of this case to the petition of appeal in the court of first instance that the defendant, the co-defendant C, and D had a loan claim against them, and sought a payment of KRW 200 million against them, and the plaintiff exercised the creditor's subrogation right against the defendant in the preparatory document dated November 26, 2018 at the court of first instance.

In addition, the obligee represents the debtor.