1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. On July 3, 2007, the Plaintiff entered into an investment agreement with the Defendant and the co-defendant B of the first instance trial (hereinafter “B”) to the effect that “the Defendant and B receive KRW 230 million from the Plaintiff and purchase real estate at cost according to the D Development Plan, the Defendant and B guarantee their responsibilities and principal for the purchase of the said real estate, and the investment period shall not exceed two years.”

(hereinafter “instant investment agreement”). (b)

Under the instant investment agreement, the Plaintiff paid KRW 230 million to the Defendant and B (hereinafter “instant investment amount”).

C. As the Plaintiff failed to recover the instant investment amount even after the investment period stipulated in the instant investment agreement, on December 8, 2010, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant and B a certificate of content that the Plaintiff returned the entire investment principal by the end of January 2011.

B, on February 1, 2010, a repayment plan was formulated with the purport that “50 million won out of the instant investment amount shall be repaid until April 30, 2012, and the remainder shall be repaid until October 3, 2012,” to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff, with the account in F’s name, KRW 3 million on June 13, 201, is the Plaintiff.

8. On November 1, 198, a sum of KRW 8 million, including KRW 5 million, was paid to return part of the instant investment funds.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 4 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is jointly and severally liable with B to pay to the plaintiff the unpaid amount of KRW 222,00,000 and delay damages for the aforementioned amount of the investment in this case, barring any special circumstance.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to the assertion on comprehensive transfer of obligations under the instant investment agreement, the Defendant comprehensively transferred the Defendant’s claims and obligations under the instant investment agreement to B around September 2009, and the Plaintiff’s husband E also consented thereto.