1. The defendants' appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

The reasoning of the first instance judgment is reasonable, and this is the same as the examination of the evidence submitted by the appellate court in addition to the evidence submitted by the first instance court. Thus, pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the reasoning of the first instance judgment is cited as the ground of this judgment, and the lower court added the judgment as to the main argument that the Plaintiff

The Defendants asserted that, in the process of their request from B for the estimation of civil engineering works, they met the Plaintiff in a place where B and the Plaintiff were together, and they merely received KRW 2 million in terms of the above estimate, such as the cost of receiving the premium, etc., and no other money was paid. They asserted that, in collusion with B, the Defendants did not collect money from the Plaintiff as investment money in collusion with the Plaintiff, and that this fact is sufficiently supported by the fact that B was convicted of the Plaintiff due to fraud against the Plaintiff, etc., even though B was convicted of the Plaintiff, there was a non-prosecution disposition of suspicion of fraud against the Defendants.

However, B, as a witness of the first instance trial, was the Defendants at the site of the Plaintiff, and he received KRW 120 million from the Plaintiff on two occasions in terms of investment, and testified to C in detail that he paid KRW 30 million to Defendant D, KRW 10 million to Defendant E, and KRW 17 million to Defendant E. The content seems to be easily known unless he did not directly experience.

In addition, there is no circumstance that B’s testimony to be disadvantageous to the Defendants is deemed more favorable to B in legal and economic terms.

In addition, there is no assertion or proof of circumstances that may give rise to doubt about the credibility of testimony B by the witness of the first instance court.

Furthermore, although the examination of witness B by the court of first instance was conducted in the presence of the defendants' attorney, the contents of the aforementioned testimony by the witness B are impeachment or the defendants' above.