1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

On the third side of the judgment of the first instance court, "the plaintiff" in the second half of the judgment shall be "the plaintiff and the defendant shall be "the name of the plaintiff".

The first instance court's fourth page "the plaintiff" in the second page of the second instance judgment shall be "the plaintiff and the defendant shall be "the name of the plaintiff".

Part 4 of the decision of the first instance court, the "land No. 1" in Part 19 of the decision of the first instance court is the "land No. 1 among the lots of this case".

Part 5 of the judgment of the first instance court, "No. 1, No. 2 land" in Part 5 of the judgment of the first instance court is "No. 1, No. 2 land among the land in this case".

From 8th to 10th to 8th 12th 10th 10th 9th 10th 10th 1st 2th 1

The defendant asserts that the defendant's summary of the defendant's assertion 1) has remaining remaining remaining remaining business, such as the service charge to F, the obligation to H, AA, K, and N, which is the consent to land use, and the obligation to village residents incurred in the course of obtaining the consent to land use. Thus, the defendant did not go through a liquidation procedure for partnership property even though it is necessary to go through a liquidation procedure, and after going through a liquidation procedure, the defendant has a duty to distribute the remaining assets of the partnership of this case to the defendant.

2) Determination on the necessity of liquidation procedures) Where a partnership is dissolved due to the achievement of the purpose of the partnership’s relevant legal principles, but there is no way to dispose of the remaining assets of the partnership. However, where only the distribution of the remaining assets remains, each partner may immediately claim for the distribution of the remaining assets to the partnership members who hold the remaining assets in excess of the distribution ratio of their residual assets within the scope of their distribution ratio.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da35713 delivered on April 21, 2000, etc.).B.