1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. On December 20, 2012, the plaintiffs asserted that they leased KRW 250 million to the defendant and D, respectively, for six months from the date of repayment due, respectively, and they jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation to return the principal and interest of the above loan on the same day.

On the other hand, the defendant and D paid profits from each of the above loans on the same day, and they issued promissory notes with a face value of KRW 250 million at the face value as of January 25, 2013 to the plaintiff Eul, and with a face value of KRW 200 million at the face value as of January 25, 2013, respectively, to the plaintiff Eul, and then endorsed and transferred them to E without exempting the preparation of a certificate of non-payment. The plaintiffs become the final holders of each of the above promissory notes.

However, the defendant, E, and D did not pay the borrowed principal even though the due date has expired, and the plaintiffs were refused to pay each of the above promissory notes within the due date of payment.

Therefore, the defendant is jointly and severally liable with E and D to pay to the plaintiff KRW 50 million (250 million of the borrowed principal + KRW 250 million of the Promissory Notes amounting to KRW 250 million) and damages for delay thereof, and to the plaintiff Eul 450 million of the borrowed principal (250 million of the borrowed principal + KRW 200 million of the Promissory Notes amount) and damages for delay.

2. Determination

A. (1) Determination on the claim for return of a loan under the Civil Act is based on the following: (a) a loan for consumption under the Civil Act enters into force when one of the parties agrees to transfer the ownership of money or other substitutes to the other party, and the other party agrees to return it in such kind, quality, and quantity; (b) in order for the lender to seek the “return” of a loan based on a loan for consumption, the borrower has to prove that the borrower has received money in addition to the establishment of a loan for consumption; (c) however, in full view of the overall purport of arguments in the items of evidence Nos. 2 and 6, the Plaintiffs set the amount of KRW 250 million to the Defendant around December 2012 as the period from December 20, 2012 to six months.