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. Basic facts

A. Upon receiving a request from D to lend money necessary to repair a restaurant operated by the Defendant, the Plaintiffs transferred KRW 10 million to the deposit account in the name of the Defendant as follows.

Plaintiff A, June 16, 2014, KRW 10 million, KRW 5 million on June 28, 2014, KRW 5 million on June 29, 2014

B. D repaid 2 million won to Plaintiff A and 2.5 million won to Plaintiff B, respectively.

C. Around June 16, 2014, D borrowed KRW 10 million to Plaintiff A.

“Contents” to the Plaintiff B, around August 2015, the amount of KRW 7.5 million

9. The promise to complete payment up to 30.

‘I have drawn up and issued each loan certificate with the content. D.

The defendant was in de facto marital relationship between D and D in 2006 to spring in 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-4, Eul 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion D borrowed money under the name of restaurant repair costs and living expenses of the defendant in a de facto marital relationship constitutes a legal act related to daily home affairs, and thus, the defendant is jointly and severally liable for D's loan obligations pursuant to Article 832 of the Civil Act.

3. Determination

A. Article 832 of the Civil Act provides that “a juristic act concerning daily home affairs” refers to a juristic act ordinarily required for common life of both spouses. Thus, whether a juristic act in question concerns daily home affairs ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective type or nature of the juristic act, the intent and purpose of the person who performed the juristic act, the actual living conditions of both spouses, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da46877 delivered on March 9, 1999). B.

In full view of the circumstances described in Section B-1, Section B-1, Section B-1, Section B-2, Section B-B-1, and Section B-4-1, and Section B-2, it is difficult to regard D’s debt to be a debt due to ordinary work, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the debt.

The plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

1. At the time of borrowing money from the plaintiffs, D.