1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The facts alleged by the plaintiff at the trial of the first instance do not differ significantly from the contents alleged by the plaintiff at the trial of the first instance, and even after examining the plaintiff's claims together with the evidence submitted at the trial of the first instance and the trial, it is justifiable to find and determine the facts of the first instance court that the defendant implicitly expressed his intention of reservation to the plaintiff who is the project operator while receiving the deposit of this case.

Therefore, the reasoning for this court’s reasoning is as follows: (a) the Defendant’s respective “Defendant” in the judgment of the first instance is each “Plaintiff”; and (b) the Plaintiff’s “Plaintiff” in the judgment of the first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except when using the “Defendant” in the judgment of the first instance as “Defendant”; and (c) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.