All appeals by the defendant are dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

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

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as set forth in paragraph 2; and the defendant's argument added in the trial of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to adding the judgment of the court of first instance as set forth in paragraph 3 below; therefore, it shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Part 3-b) of the judgment of the first instance in the first instance (from No. 5th to No. 10th, 5th to 6th) shall be written in the following manner:

B. As to the lapse of the statute of limitations, the Defendant’s claim for the repayment of the investment amount to the Plaintiffs under the instant agreement is subject to the short-term statute of limitations of five years with commercial claims. The said claim occurred on December 4, 2013, which was one year after the date when the Plaintiffs completed the payment of the investment amount, pursuant to Article 2(3) of the instant agreement, and the Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit on October 30, 2019, which was five years after the said date. As such, the Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit on October 30, 2019, the Plaintiffs’ claim for the return of the investment amount had expired due to the expiration of the statute of limitations.

defense.

2) A merchant is the subject of the rights and obligations arising out of a commercial activity. It is naturally premised on the fact that an act for business purposes is qualified as a merchant in order to be subject to the Commercial Act as an auxiliary commercial activity.

Even if a company is deemed a merchant under the Commercial Act, the representative director, who is an institution of the company, is not a merchant. Even if a representative director borrows money or receives an investment in the company’s operating fund, it does not constitute a commercial activity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 92Da7948, Nov. 10, 1992; 201Da43594, Jul. 26, 2012). Moreover, a merchant’s investment in money in his/her personal capacity regardless of his/her business cannot be deemed as an ancillary commercial activity for the previous business of the merchant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Da43594, Apr. 24, 2018).