1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. From March 8, 2007, the Defendant operated E in Ansan-si from around March 8, 2007, operated E, contracted construction machinery, and provided construction machinery leasing services. The Plaintiff C was engaged in regular business in L, and was engaged in the business related to the operation of Plaintiff A and B-do pumps.

B. On January 2013, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant agreed to divide the operating profits generated from the above businesses equally between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant by jointly investing in the business of awarding and leasing concrete pumps construction equipment.

(2) According to the agreement of the instant club business, Plaintiff A operated the instant club business with E, respectively, by investing KRW 80 million in cash ( KRW 10 million, KRW 70 million, KRW 70 million, KRW 70 million, KRW 30 million, KRW 30 million, KRW 30 million, KRW 100 million, and KRW 100 million in cash) in the H E office in Ansan-dong, while the Defendant was in charge of the instant club business agreement, including the management of the office and the maintenance of pumps, the overall business management, including the operation of pumps and the management of pumps, and the operation of pumps and pumps at the business site for receiving orders, Plaintiff C was in charge of the operation of construction works and the funds, Plaintiff C, and Plaintiff A and B at the construction site.

C. The Defendant, the Plaintiff A, and B, after completing the business registration of pumps, used a passbook in their respective names for the issuance of tax invoices for the contracted construction and for the transfer of the law firm installments. Even after the instant agreement, the Defendant used the account in the name of the Defendant (J account and K account; hereinafter “each of the instant accounts”) in which the Defendant’s funds used by the Defendant were mixed from the previous one, as the business process operation account under the instant agreement.

The Plaintiffs, even though they agreed to distribute profits after settling accounts at the end of each year with the Defendant, did not receive proper settlement of the operating income for two years after the starting of the business, and embezzled the Defendant’s operating income from each of the instant accounts in the name of the Defendant.