The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

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

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the court shall use "other" of the fourth 4th 4th son of the judgment of the court of first instance as "by"; and (b) other than adding the following to the fifth 5th son of the judgment of the court of first instance, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

v. v. v. The Plaintiff and the Defendant seem to have discussed that the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with funds necessary for D’s business at the time of the instant agreement.

However, the instant agreement, which is a disposition document, or the instant 1, 2 authentic deeds, etc., do not specify the Defendant’s business that the Defendant invested, and the evidence submitted, such as the evidence No. 4, is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff explained to the Defendant about the specific project or its investment profits, etc. and made an investment in money for the benefit therefrom.

Ultimately, the Defendant entered into the instant agreement with the intent to earn profits by investing in the “specific business in D”

The Plaintiff’s promise to guarantee the principal and fixed income upon the request of funds for the D’s projects, and the instant agreement was concluded with the belief of the Plaintiff’s promise to guarantee the principal and fixed income upon the request of funds.

may be seen.

If the Defendant paid the money with the belief of the necessity of D’s funds or the certainty of the repayment of funds without specifying the project subject to investment, it is reasonable to regard it as a loan to D, not an investment in D or its projects.

6. The defendant does not specify the possibility of loss under the agreement of this case, but if D fails to carry on the business due to the nature of the investment, it is clear that the loss will occur.

The argument is asserted.

However, in the agreement between the defendant, D and the plaintiff, including the instant agreement, the defendant is regardless of the progress of the business of D.