1. The part against the plaintiff falling under the following order of payment among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked:

2...

1. Basic facts

A. On April 17, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with B to provide a loan of KRW 3,000,000 per annum, overdue interest rate, 39% per annum, and 60 months from the date of concluding the loan contract.

B. Around that time, the Plaintiff’s counselor notified the Defendant of the fact that he/she recorded the fact of joint and several sureties with respect to the above loan, and requested the Defendant to prepare and send a joint and several sureties contract for the above loan that the joint and several sureties’s column, etc. was an official disturbance.

C. When the Plaintiff’s counselor submitted a joint and several surety contract under the Defendant’s name that the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligation, he again asked the Defendant whether the above contract was written as a joint and several surety, and the Defendant asked the Defendant whether it was written as a joint and several surety. As to this, the Defendant asked the Defendant

Accordingly, on April 17, 2013, the Plaintiff remitted the above loans of KRW 3,000,000 to B.

However, as the credit rating of B reaches Grade 9 and there is a registration of default information in financial institutions, the Plaintiff is unable to recover KRW 2,986,89 out of the above loans from B.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to the above facts of recognition of the liability for damages, although the defendant did not have written himself in the above joint and several sureties contract, it is false to the plaintiff's employee seeking confirmation by telephone, and the plaintiff believed that he had concluded a valid joint and several sureties contract with the defendant due to such deception by the defendant and lent KRW 3,000,000 to B.

Thus, the above act of the defendant constitutes a tort by deception and the defendant constitutes the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.