1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

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

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation as to the instant case is as follows, except for the following determination as to the allegations that the Plaintiff used or added the pertinent part and added to the trial, and thus, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts used or added;

A. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, Part II “D” in Part 8 shall be added to “F”.

B. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the third part of the judgment is as follows.

"In the absence of any dispute, Gap evidence 4-2, Gap evidence 5-2, Gap evidence 6-1, Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings"

C. In the first instance judgment, the part concerning the stamp image of the above real estate sales contract (Evidence No. 5-2) shall be added to "(1) on the date of the first instance trial of the court of first instance, the plaintiff recognized the part concerning the stamp image of the above real estate sales contract (Evidence No. 5-2) on the date of the first instance trial, and (2) even according to the plaintiff's assertion, a certified judicial scrivener, the plaintiff, and the defendant prepared a new real estate sales contract (Evidence No. 5-2) in lieu of the existing real estate sales contract (Evidence No. 5-1 of the evidence No. 5-2) in order to avoid the imposition of a fine for negligence on the job collected by the defendant, and returned immediately to a certified judicial scrivener (the face No. 8 of the Reasons for Appeal), and in light of the above reasons for the above preparation, the above

Once the fourth decision of the first instance is rendered, the following shall be added to the following:

On the other hand, while examining the details of the financial transaction up to that point on July 27, 2016 with the Defendant, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff had confirmed the unpaid amount of KRW 95,000,000, out of the remainder of KRW 100,000,000, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.”

3. Additional determination

A. The plaintiff has reached the trial, and ① the defendant is the defendant.