1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

1. The grounds alleged by the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance. Thus, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are recognized as legitimate even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance and the additional evidences added in this court are comprehensively

Therefore, this court's reasoning is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for partial dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, this court's reasoning is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In the second part of the judgment of the court of first instance, "25,568,906 won" was added to "25,568,908 won" in the second part of the judgment of the court of first instance.

If the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed, "B No. 1" shall be added to the 18th [based grounds for recognition].

On the other hand, the evidence and evidence Nos. 4, 7, 9, 11, 9, 10, 9, 10, 9, and 10 (including a branch number if there is a branch number; hereinafter the same shall apply) of the first instance judgment shall be written on the other hand with evidence and evidence Nos. 4, 7, 9, 11, 14, 15, 9, 10, 14, 19, 19 (including a branch number if there is a branch number; hereinafter the same shall apply).

Part 5 of the judgment of the first instance court, "the business license was issued" was read as "the business license was issued, and the sub-committee deposited KRW 150 million in the bank account in the name of K on the same day."

Part 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the term "to be opened" in Part 12 shall be changed to "to be reconstructed."

Part 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance was written by inserting "No. 2017Gahap56020" in Part 18 of the judgment of first instance to "Magju District Court 2017Gahap56020."

The following shall be added to the sixth-party judgment of the first instance.

In addition, “H actually operated the instant entertainment tavern in the course of investigating the instant accusation case, and the Plaintiff stated that the Plaintiff loaned KRW 398 million to the Plaintiff as it is necessary to operate the said entertainment tavern. However, the Nonparty Company raised a lawsuit against the Plaintiff.