1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following changes in the reasoning, thereby citing it as is by the main sentence of Article 420

2. The modified part of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter referred to as “the judgment on the sale of the right to purchase and sell the ownership of Defendant C and D”) shall be modified as follows.

The Plaintiff asserted that: (a) the Plaintiff’s claim for return of unjust enrichment against Defendant B (the primary claim) and the Plaintiff purchased the ownership of the Defendant C from Defendant B on December 16, 2015 and December 17, 2015; (b) the ownership of the ownership of the Defendant D on December 18, 2015; and (c) the ownership of the ownership of the ownership of the ownership of the Defendant D on December 19, 2015, totaling KRW 119 million; and (b) the above sales contract becomes null and void; (c) the Plaintiff’s claim for return of unjust enrichment (the purchase price of KRW 29,750,00 (the purchase price of KRW 19,00) 】 (the purchase price of KRW 25,80) 】 (the purchase price of KRW 10,000) 】 (the purchase price of KRW 50 per annum from December 18, 2015 to the sale price of the instant land; and (d) the Plaintiff’s claim for sale of KRW 15.5.

In light of the above, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff and Defendant B were the parties to the sales contract for the purchase and sale right of Defendant C and D, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise. Therefore, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.