The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

According to the reasoning of the judgment, the court below found that the plaintiff was lawful by the introduction of the non-party on April 2, 1971 to the non-party 1,80, and the total amount of KRW 3,737,00,00, which was totaled KRW 720,000, which was purchased from the defendant, but the purchase price was fully paid at KRW 1,80,00,000, which was the land at issue of this case, was entirely recorded in the public register at the time of the conclusion of the contract between the defendant, but its status was 1,35,00,000, which was 70,000, and the remaining 445,000,000 won was 70,000,000 won and 70,000,000,000 won, which was 70,000,000 won and 7,000,00,000 won.

The grounds of appeal No. 4 are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below rejected the plaintiff's main claim of this case without accepting the plaintiff's main claim, and further, even in the conjunctive claim, as seen earlier (as to the plaintiff's claim to revoke the sales contract of 3,737 square meters which is the subject of the sale in this case), it is obvious by the records that the plaintiff did not appeal against the part against the plaintiff's loss as to the part against which the plaintiff lost was not the subject of the judgment of the court below. Thus, the court below's decision that did not consider the part against the plaintiff as the object of the judgment is just and there is no error of law of omission of judgment as pointed out in this theory.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Young-young (Presiding Justice)