1. Of the parts concerning the counterclaim against the judgment of the court of first instance, the following amounts shall be the amount ordered to be paid:

1. The first instance court dismissed both the Plaintiff’s principal claim and the Defendant’s counterclaim.

In that sense, the judgment of the appellate court is limited to the part of the defendant's counterclaim claim because only the defendant filed an appeal against the counterclaim among the judgment of the first instance court.

2. The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the appellate court is the same as that for the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance, and thus, this part is quoted by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (hereinafter referred to as “a summary of the judgment of the first instance”). 3. Determination as to the counterclaim claim

A. The Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant loaned KRW 8.42 billion in total ( KRW 7.42 billion in total) to C according to a loan agreement for consumption loan contract for KRW 1 and secondary funds, and the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation to return the above loan.

The Defendant claimed against the Plaintiff, a joint guarantor, KRW 250 million, which is part of the principal and interest of the above loan (i.e., KRW 100 million, interest KRW 20 million, delayed damages KRW 8 million, the principal and interest of the second loan contract, KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000,000) and damages for delay.

2) The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant paid the money paid out of the first and second loans is not a loan, but an investment fund in the partnership between the Plaintiff and the Defendant for the LPG charging business, and thus, the Defendant’s counterclaim cannot be accepted.

B. 1) As long as a disposition is recognized to be authentic in its formation, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposition document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof as to the denial of the contents of the statement. In a case where there is any difference between the parties regarding the interpretation of the contract, and the interpretation of the intent of the parties expressed in the disposition document is at issue, it shall be in accordance with the language and text, and the motive and background of