2. According to Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 1 and 2, the plaintiff is acknowledged to have jointly purchased three shares of the defendant among the land of this case with C and D (the contract includes "the plaintiff and two persons" as the purchaser, and Eul specifies "C" with the purchaser other than the plaintiff, and the remaining one of the purchaser in light of the plaintiff's purchase circumstance, etc. is "D". 3. The special contract Nos. 1 and 3. 1 (a sales contract) of this case agreed that "C shall be "D" and the transfer income tax shall be borne by the purchaser. However, according to the fact that C did not perform all the above special contract, the purchase price of the third land of this case is 10 million won after the defendant sold the third land of this case, 10 million won and 10 million won to be borne by the purchaser, 42,4263,450,500 won in total, 300 won in total, 3605 won in total, 500 won in real property of this case).

Although the plaintiff was not directly responsible for this part, the plaintiff was not directly responsible for this part.

Even if it is a matter agreed to be borne by D and C as a joint purchaser, it is an amount to be naturally deducted from the proceeds from the sale of land No. 3 in this case.

[See Articles 262(2) and 262(2) of the Civil Act and Article 262(2) of the Civil Act are presumed to be the same (see Article 262(2) of the Civil Act).