약정금
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1.
1. The grounds for appeal by the Defendants cited in the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance shows each of the evidence (Evidence No. 11, No. 13, No. 12 and No. 14) submitted in the court of first instance, the fact-finding and the judgment of the court of first instance are justifiable.
Therefore, the reasoning for this court’s explanation is as follows, except for adding the following judgments to the allegations added by this court, and therefore, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this court’s explanation is acceptable pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
2. Additional determination
A. The Defendants’ assertion 1) concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B on November 18, 2017, both the first agreement on the instant D Fishing Ground and the second agreement on the “E Fishing Ground,” which were concluded on November 18, 2017 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, fall under an investment agreement (an investment agreement with the Plaintiff’s investment of funds to Defendant B by constructing a new extraction facility and collecting and delivering a new lighting until the Plaintiff’s investment reduction period), and thus, the risk of loss from failure of the investment due to failure of the business must be borne by the Plaintiff, the investor, and the Defendant B did not have the obligation to return the investment amount. As such, the first agreement on the Plaintiff’s investment repayment obligation against the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff, even if the first agreement on the Plaintiff constituted a new lighting supply contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant B had the Plaintiff obtained the new water resources collection period from the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff on May 28, 2018, and had the Plaintiff receive the new water resources collection period from the Defendant 1 to the Plaintiff on May 218, 2018.
Therefore, the suspension of new lighting delivery is possible.