1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: (a) the Defendant B’s “Defendant B” in the judgment of the court of first instance as “Defendant”; and (b) the Defendant C’s “Defendant C” as “joint Defendant of the court of first instance”; and (c) the Plaintiff’s assertion emphasized in this court is identical to the judgment of the court of first instance, except for additional determination as to the assertion

2. Additional determination

A. While engaging in the business of the Plaintiff’s assertion in the partnership, D agreed to obtain a joint loan of KRW 3 billion in the name of the co-defendant of the first instance trial from the financial right through the provision of security and guarantee, and the Plaintiff directly lent KRW 4 billion to the Defendant and the co-defendant of the first instance trial.

Even according to Article 5 of the instant investment agreement, the Defendant and the co-defendants of the first instance court agreed to repay KRW 1 billion on the last day of every April from 2015 to 2018.

Thus, it is clear that the plaintiff lent 4 billion won to the defendant.

The defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the principal of the loan amounting to four billion won and the agreed interest thereon.

B. Determination 1) The Plaintiff concluded the instant loan contract with the purport of lending KRW 1 billion to co-defendants in the first instance trial, and the fact that the Plaintiff paid a sum of KRW 4 billion to co-defendants in the first instance trial. However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged in addition to the overall purport of the arguments as seen earlier, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff lent KRW 4 billion to the Defendant only based on the above recognized facts and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

① The instant loan agreement was made between the Plaintiff and the co-defendant in the first instance trial.

The Plaintiff loaned KRW 1 billion to co-defendants in the first instance trial, and the co-defendants in the first instance court agreed to refund the principal and pay interest until the end of December 2015.

There is no provision that the Defendant shall pay the principal amount of one billion won to the Plaintiff and interest thereon.

② The instant case.