1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the part of the judgment of the first instance, which is not more than 3, 14, 2, 5, and 13 (2) shall be deleted; and (b) the new argument of the plaintiffs in the trial of the first instance is subject to the grounds of the judgment of the first instance, except for adding the judgment under paragraph (2) below to the new argument of the plaintiffs in the trial of the first instance

2. The portion to be judged additionally

A. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant had a duty to deliver KRW 325 million, which is the amount under the instant loan agreement, to the Plaintiffs, but did not implement the instant loan agreement by bringing 298.5 million won, i.e., mother and child., the Defendant did not execute it. Therefore, the Defendant rescinded the instant loan agreement.

Therefore, the secured obligation of the instant mortgage was extinguished.

Therefore, the right to collateral security of this case must be cancelled.

B. According to the evidence mentioned above, the plaintiff Eul and the defendant discussed with each party E about the amount of loans to be actually received according to the loan agreement of this case, and there is no discussion about it directly by the plaintiff Eul and the defendant. The evidence submitted by the plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize that the amount of the actual loan agreed through E is KRW 325 million, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and the plaintiffs' above assertion based on this premise is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.