1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 200,000,000 as well as to this on February 2, 2015.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation as to this case is as follows. The defendant’s argument in the trial of the court of first instance is identical to the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for further determination under the following two, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

The 3 pages 8 of the first instance judgment shall be amended to "Hanam-si M" in the 3 pages 8th sentence.

The 3th 19th 19th 19th 3th 19th 1st 19th 19th 19th 204 “the 11th 11th 2004”, and the 20th 20th 20th 20th 3th 20 each amendment to “the check”.

At the bottom of three pages of the judgment of the first instance court, one to three shall be amended as follows:

A person shall be appointed.

E. Meanwhile, the Defendant’s clan was sentenced to a judgment against June 18, 2004 in the instant clan lawsuit, and the Seoul High Court appealed as Seoul High Court 2004Na55393, 55409 (Joint) but was sentenced to dismissal on November 14, 2006.

Accordingly, the defendant's clan was appealed by the Supreme Court Decision 2006Da85709, 85716 (Joint) but the judgment against the defendant was finalized at that time by the Supreme Court's decision dismissing the non-trial trial of February 22, 2007.

The 4th 10th 10th 10th 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 4th 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 22

The 2006 "2,006" of the 7th sentence of the first instance court shall be changed to "2006", and the 7th sentence at the bottom of the same side shall be changed to "the appointment of counsel".

The first instance court's decision " February 22, 2007" at the bottom of the eight pages of the judgment of the first instance shall be amended to "round February 22, 2007".

7 pages 9 of the first instance judgment shall be amended by adding "200 million to the above amount" in addition to "100 million."

On February 22, 2007, the obligation to enter into an agreement was already impossible under the social norms on February 22, 2007, and on February 12, 2007, the obligation to enter into an agreement was already impossible under the social norms.