1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part concerning the conjunctive claim against the Defendant is modified as follows:

The defendant.

1. The scope of this Court’s trial at the first instance trial against the Defendant and the Co-Defendant J of the first instance trial (hereinafter “Defendant, etc.”) along with the co-Plaintiff A and seven persons (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) prior to the remanding of the case. The Plaintiff filed a claim for reimbursement of the principal claim against the Defendant and the Co-Defendant J of the first instance trial (hereinafter “Defendant, etc.”). The first instance court dismissed the Plaintiff, etc.’s primary claim and accepted the conjunctive claim.

Accordingly, only the Defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and the first instance court prior to the remand accepted part of the Defendant’s appeal on the ancillary claim against the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant appealed, and the Supreme Court reversed only the part of the Plaintiff’s claim in the judgment prior to the remand, and remanded it to this court.

(S) The part of the claim by the Plaintiff et al. is dismissed by the Defendant’s appeal, and the judgment of the court prior to its remand became final and conclusive as it is). Accordingly, the subject of this court’s trial is limited to the part that was reversed and remanded as above, i.e., the Plaintiff

2. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the co-implementer and the co-contractor of the instant reconstruction project and the joint implementer of the district comprehensive construction company (hereinafter “non-party company”) located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City V (hereinafter “instant reconstruction project”), and the co-defendant J of the first instance court concluded a contract with the non-party company to distribute investment profits to the non-party company.

B. Around December 2008, the Defendant, etc. filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the third party (hereinafter “third party’s lawsuit”) with the Court No. 2008GaGa1384777 in order to prevent compulsory execution based on the original of the judgment of provisional execution with executory power of each of the sale proceeds cases (hereinafter “each of the instant judgments”) against the buyers of the non-party company around December 2008.