1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

The reasoning for the court's explanation on this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, with the exception of adding "No. 2013No2897" in the last part of "No. 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance," and "No. 2014Do1642" in the following in the last part of "No. 2013No. 2897 of the same court of first instance," and in the same case, "No. 1642 of the same court of first instance" shall be added to "No. 1642 of the same court of first instance," and the part "no. 2 of the court of first instance" in the last part of "No. 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance," and this part shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main part of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Furthermore, in full view of the relationship between the original Defendant and the circumstances revealed by the adopted evidence and the facts acknowledged, such as the developments leading up to the construction of the instant building, and the source of funds, and in particular, it appears that the said construction cost was paid with the funds used in the trade and joint management of the instant building. The instant building was newly constructed for the original purpose of “E”, and the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff acquired the entire building of the instant building on the Plaintiff’s individual’s property and account, but no particular material is found regarding the funding relationship to deem that the Plaintiff paid the principal and interest of the secured debt of the instant building, which is set up on the building and the site, to be irrelevant to the project funds of “E”, it is reasonable to deem that the instant building is either the property formed through the “E” business operated jointly by the Plaintiff or the property provided or invested in the said business.

A.