2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. On April 28, 2010, the Plaintiff’s assertion was requested by the Defendant to pay C the purchase price of KRW 174 square meters and KRW 68,000,000 for the purchase price of KRW 174 square meters and KRW 68,325 square meters before E, Seopo-si purchased from C, Seopo-si, and then paid KRW 68,00,000 to C in advance. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 68,00,000 and delay damages therefor.

B. The fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 68,00,000 to C on April 28, 2010 on behalf of the Defendant to the Defendant is either a dispute between the parties, or that the Plaintiff paid KRW 68,00,00 on behalf of the Defendant, based on the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in subparagraphs 2-1 and 2.

However, as shown in the Plaintiff’s assertion, it is difficult to believe that the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 5 was stated in the Plaintiff’s assertion, and the remaining evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and the Plaintiff’s

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1 and 3-1 and 6-3 of evidence Nos. 1 and 3-3, the plaintiff, the defendant, the father-related person, the defendant was divorced around 2009 and was missing from the status of bankruptcy to the extent that he would reside in the Public Notice Board located in Seoul with his business failure. The plaintiff, the father of the defendant, knew of this fact, made the plaintiff, who was the father of the defendant, moving the defendant to Jeju-do and let the plaintiff engage in the business of cultivating and processing and selling the plaintiff, and around 2009, the plaintiff's husband and wife supported the defendant to complete the defendant's debt for the defendant. The defendant established the FF farming association under the former support of the plaintiff on Feb. 23, 2010 and started the farming business under his leading. However, from around Feb. 2013, the defendant and the plaintiff's husband and wife were in conflict with the plaintiff's husband and wife on Feb. 1, 2014.