1. The judgment of the first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim expanded in the trial, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant.

1. The court's explanation concerning this case is based on the second-class judgment of the court of first instance.

Pursuant to paragraph 2-A(b)(3) of this section, in accordance with the purport of the claim extended in the trial as described in paragraph 2-2(a) below, the following sub-paragraph 2(b)

The defendant's argument added in the trial as stated in paragraph (3) is the same as the statement in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the judgment of the court below as stated in paragraph (3). Thus, it is accepted by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. A part used in a trial;

(a) Decision 2-B of the first instance court; and

As to the instant case 2, the following circumstances revealed, i.e., (i) the Plaintiff had a claim for land usage fee determined by settlement recommendation or judgment, as seen earlier, and (ii) the Plaintiff appears to have received the claim for land usage fee of this case, which C et al. possessed by the Defendant due to the means to recover the said claim; and (iii) the instant land was owned by the heir C et al. and the Defendant, who were the Plaintiff et al., but upon the Defendant’s share sold to the Plaintiff et al. through compulsory sale by official auction, C et al. borne the Plaintiff with the burden of paying the land usage fee. Accordingly, it appears that C et al. need to resolve the land usage fee of this case solely owned by the Defendant who lost the land share to the Plaintiff by transferring the land usage fee of this case to the Plaintiff, and (iii) the difference between the claim amount of land usage fee of the Plaintiff et al. and the claim amount of the land usage fee of the Defendant transferred to the Plaintiff.