1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as stated in the part “1. Basic Facts” from the second 8th of the judgment of the first instance to the third 12th one of the 12th one. Therefore, this Court’s explanation is citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The Plaintiff and the Deceased agreed to jointly invest funds on September 2005, acquire the remainder of the forest land at the time of Silsan, exchange them with each land at Yangsan and distribute profits according to their investment ratio after selling them again. (2) The Plaintiff and the Deceased agreed to acquire shares of 90% remaining after completing the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of F after acquiring shares of 10% of the remaining 90% of the forest land at Silsan and Yangsan City, except for the shares of Silsan Forest (10%) held by F pursuant to the above agreement, and complete the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of F.

3) Under the above agreement, the Plaintiff invested KRW 405,00,000, and KRW 616,994,000,000, respectively, and KRW 900,000,000, respectively, as joint debt, borrowed in the name of the Plaintiff or the Deceased, and repaid the said investment proceeds. Therefore, the investment ratio of the Plaintiff and the Deceased is KRW 39.63%: 60.37%. 4) As security, each of the land in the Namsan City was financed by 156,60,000 from the Nam Changwon National Agricultural Cooperative and the Plaintiff was divided into KRW 156,60,000, and the Deceased was 740,700,000,000, and the remainder was used for the repayment of joint debt.

In addition, the plaintiff received 868,480,701 won in total as the sale price of AD land and the brokerage honorarium at the time of entertainment, and the plaintiff divided 300,000,000 won in total, and the deceased divided the remaining 568,480,701 won.

In addition, after the death of the deceased, Defendant D received KRW 400,000,000 from F, and the F’s fraudulent N, who had the claim for reimbursement, received KRW 400,000,000 from the deceased, and thus, the above KRW 800,000 is also the deceased’s revenues.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s profit amounting to KRW 456,60,000 (=156,600,000 won) and KRW 2,109,180,701 for the Deceased and KRW 740,700 for the Deceased.