1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From October 2009, the Defendant, a dentist, had from high school-friendly C and Seo-gu Incheon District D ground building 501 to operate a partnership business, and prepared a partnership business contract with the following contents:

The Plaintiff owns the above building and site in the register of the punishment of C and 1/2 shares, respectively.

Article 3 Initial inputs and Method of Contribution

1. The Defendant A refers to the Defendant of this case.

Section B refers to Section C.

the initial input cost will be KRW 350 million, respectively.

30 million won 20 million won

2. Initial inputs: A shall be required to purchase CT physical fishing material and appliances, etc., and B shall be required to purchase lease deposit for the term of office, etc. between lease deposit and lease deposit for the term of office.

(A) Article 4 of the Act on the Financing and Repayment

1. A shall be provided with the real estate of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, F apartment 628 Dong 1401 (Seoul, F apartment 628 Dong 1401) as collateral, and the method of repayment shall be the fund raising from the ordinary city bank as the amount of personal credit loans, and the method of repayment shall be the highest priority order at the time when the H value division located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (A was in operation at the time

2.B shall borrow from A 350 million won and shall be separate redemption key.

After monthly settlement of accounts for the method of distributing profits under Article 5 of KRW 300 million, Gap and Eul will make an agreement to distribute the profits to 60:40.

The number of parts is the part amended to Gap and Eul.

B. The partnership relationship between the Defendant and C was terminated on March 2012. Since the partnership agreement concluded with the Defendant, not a dentist, was null and void, the Defendant brought an action against C seeking the return of the amount acquired or used by the said Defendant out of hospital revenues, and in the litigation procedure, C filed a counterclaim against the Defendant seeking the return of the amount invested.

In the appellate trial of the above case (Seoul High Court 2013Na69684, 691, hereinafter “the first instance case”), the court shall grant C the Defendant KRW 71,952,536.