1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except where the judgment on the plaintiff's conjunctive claim added in this court is added, and thus, it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. 고치는 부분 ▣ 제1심판결문 제5쪽 아래에서 4행 중 ‘없다.’ 다음에 다음과 같은 설시를 추가하고, ‘오히려’를 ‘더구나’로 바꿈 『 [오히려 이 사건 제1확약서가 작성된 이후 원고는 피고에게 앞서 본 것처럼 합계 2억 원(이 사건 지급금)을 송금하였고, 그 최종송금일에 이 사건 제2확약서가 작성되었다.

However, according to each letter of undertaking of this case, the Plaintiff, instead of paying investment of KRW 200 million to the Defendant, is to acquire 20% of total investment interest in the land of this case.

As such, in light of the time when each letter of commitment of this case was prepared and the time when the Plaintiff was remitted, KRW 200 million of the payment of this case is highly likely to be an investment loan, not a loan)

3. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that if the amount of KRW 200 million paid in this case is invested money, the defendant shall be deemed to have obtained the above money by deceiving the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant shall pay the plaintiff the money stated in the claim as compensation for damages caused by the tort.

In other words, the defendant claimed that the payment of this case was received from the plaintiff as investment money for the land of this case (if the land of this case is specified in the land of this case, the land of this case shall be specified only with Dong and lot number) and it was used for other purposes. The above land was already acquired by the defendant on December 28, 2006, and its land category and status was not the land of investment value because it was a road.

In addition, each letter of commitment of this case is owned by the defendant to secure the plaintiff's claims.