1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim against the above cancellation portion is dismissed.

3.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 21, 2006, the Defendant issued and delivered a loan certificate of KRW 8,000,000 from the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the second loan certificate”) to the Plaintiff on July 30, 2005 against the Plaintiff in the name of the Defendant, which was determined at the first instance trial, on the ground of the first instance judgment, and received KRW 8,00,000 from the Plaintiff when preparing and delivering to the Plaintiff the loan certificate of KRW 30,00 from the Plaintiff.

B. On March 22, 2006, the Defendant issued and delivered to the Plaintiff a certificate of borrowing KRW 30,000,000 from the Plaintiff without setting the due date for payment with himself and C as a joint borrower (hereinafter “third-party certificate”), and received KRW 30,000,000 from the Plaintiff along with C.

(hereinafter referred to as "each of the loans of this case" collectively with the second evidence and the third evidence ; hereinafter referred to as "each of the loans of this case"). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, it is reasonable to view that the defendant, barring special circumstances, by preparing each of the loans in this case, agreed to borrow and repay the corresponding amount from the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff 38,000,000 won and delay damages therefor.

B. The grounds for this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant is actual C and the Defendant’s assertion of immunity are stated

B. (2) and (c) are the same as described in paragraphs (a) and (c), and thus, they shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

C. The defendant's defense of extinctive prescription is a defense that the five-year extinctive prescription has expired since the claim for the loan of KRW 38,000,000 according to the respective loan certificates of this case was applied under the Commercial Act.

In addition to claims arising from all commercial activities involving both parties, one of the parties shall be liable.