1. The plaintiff's appeal and the appellate court's additional claims are all dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after filing the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for an additional determination as to the claim for damages arising from a tort added by the plaintiff in the appellate court under paragraph (2). Thus, it is acceptable to

The main point of this argument is that the Plaintiff’s investment agreement in this case is null and void under Article 104 of the Civil Act or constitutes a declaration of intent by duress under Article 104 of the Civil Act, but there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the above assertion, so it is impossible to accept the Plaintiff’s claim for restitution

2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant, by deceiving and threatening the plaintiff, has caused the plaintiff to enter into the investment agreement of this case and has committed an illegal act, such as borrowing the real estate of this case as collateral, and thus, is liable for damages arising therefrom.

However, the evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the defendant's illegal act as alleged above, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The plaintiff's assertion on this part cannot be accepted.

3. If so, the judgment of the first instance is just and cannot accept the claims added by the plaintiff at the appellate court. Thus, the plaintiff's appeal and the appellate court's additional claims are dismissed in entirety.