1. The part against Defendant C in the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C is dismissed.

2. Defendant.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is reasonable, as it is reasonable, except for the following additional or re-written portions, and thus, citing the reasoning of this judgment.

2. Defendant A and B asserts that the additional part (a determination as to the additional argument in the appellate trial) was unlawful since the instant lawsuit was instituted after the lapse of the exclusion period.

However, even based on all evidence submitted, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Plaintiff was aware of the cause for cancellation one year prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit, and there is no other evidence to view it as such.

This part of the argument is not accepted.

3. Re-paid part of the judgment of the court of first instance (from 7th to 9th one) that “4. Determination D with respect to a claim against Defendant C remitted KRW 163 million to the account of Defendant C on June 17, 2011. However, in full view of the entries of Nos. 1-6 and 8-22 of the evidence (including the serial number) and the purport of the entire pleadings in the testimony of the witness E of this court, E instructed Defendant C to withdraw money from the account of son and to repay the money to Defendant C. Accordingly, it is difficult to accept the Plaintiff’s claim on June 17, 2011 on the premise that D transferred money from the account of 7th to 9th one.

4. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant A and B should be accepted on the ground of the reason, and the claim against the defendant C should be dismissed on the ground of the reason.

The judgment of the court of first instance is partially unfair by its conclusion.

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against Defendant C.