1. The appeal by the defendant (appointed party) is dismissed;

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant (appointed party).

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of the first instance, except for the case being cited or added as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts used or added;

A. On the 2nd page of the first instance judgment, the following contents are added to the 15th page.

“Defendant C repaid KRW 10,00,000 out of the above borrowed money on July 31, 2013.”

B. On the 5th page of the first instance judgment, the first instance court held that “The loan amounting to KRW 59,000,000” was “The loan amounting to KRW 49,00,000 (= the loan amounting to KRW 59,00,000 - the loan amounting to KRW 10,000,000).”

C. On the 6th page of the first instance judgment, the following contents are added.

H. On March 22, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased approximately 186 square meters from the Plaintiff’s Defendant (Appointed Party) and the designated parties (hereinafter “Defendants”) (a seller C and seller’s agent B) in the contract, the Plaintiff purchased approximately 186 square meters from the Gyeongbuk-do, Gyeongbuk-do, and the Defendants decided to construct a steel-frame building of about 50 square meters on the above land, and the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 165,00,000 in total as the sale price of the above land and the construction price of the new building.”

D. Of the 7th sentence of the first instance judgment, “659,487,800 won” in the 7th sentence “649,487,80 won (=600,487,800 won - 10,000 won)” and “66,564,020 won (659,487,800 won)” in the 7th sentence “66,564,000 won” in the 7th sentence “56,564,020 won (649,487,800 won - 625,000,000 won).”

E. On the 7th page of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the 7th instance judgment, “The plaintiff sought 56,564,020 won from among the above unlawful gains,” was added to “56,564,020 won and 56,564,020 won.”

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant (appointed party) and the appointed party should be accepted on the ground of its reasoning, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the appeal by the defendant (appointed party) is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.