All appeals are dismissed.

Costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”)’s grounds of appeal, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, determined that X acquired 302 units of multi-household 3 and 302 units of the instant multi-household 30,000 won and received loans as security from the Plaintiffs.

In light of the records, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are just and acceptable, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there are no errors in the misapprehension of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

2. As to the grounds of appeal by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, the lower court is obligated to consider the Defendant as the subject of each of the instant agreements and pay KRW 800,000,000 as agreed upon under each of the instant agreements. ② Expenses incurred by the Plaintiff in the course of performing the Defendant’s duties instead of the Plaintiff are 25,000,000 subrogated payments to the Youngdong Saemaul Depository, and the amount subrogated to the Plaintiff for the amount of KRW 54,605,845, a total of KRW 102,60,05,845,000 for reimbursement or office management expenses for U.S., and determined that the Plaintiffs were obligated to return KRW 60,000,000 for borrowed money, KRW 400,000,000, KRW 400 for the Plaintiff’s multi-household housing, KRW 405,506,505,000 for the Plaintiff’s completion of the instant agreement.

In light of the records, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are justified, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the limit of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules is limited.