1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

The court's explanation on this case is difficult to accept the "No. 4, 7" of the first instance court's decision.

No. 58(1)(2)(3)(1)(2)(1)(2)(2)(1)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2

It is difficult to find that the Plaintiff and the Defendant settled the sales amount, etc. of the instant refined land at one week unit, and furthermore, there is no evidence to acknowledge the existence of an agreement on profit distribution between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, or there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that the profit distribution was made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the statement of evidence No. 13 (Custody Certificate) as to the fact that the Defendant promised to pay the Plaintiff KRW 58 million to the Plaintiff after receiving the lease deposit amount of KRW 130 million from F.

(7) As seen earlier, the Defendant: (a) received deposit from D, the entrusted operator, and entrusted management of the instant area with the instant area at least KRW 20 million; (b) the Defendant, as alleged by the Plaintiff, entrusted management of the instant area to the Plaintiff; and (c) on the Plaintiff’s assertion, even if the Defendant and F were to have entrusted management of the instant area to the Plaintiff and received the deposit money, it seems that the instant area was not well-known at the time of the Plaintiff’s assertion, barring any special circumstances, even if the Plaintiff asserted that the instant area would not be specially well-known.

The amount equivalent to the above money.