1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The primary claim added at the trial of the instant case is the same.

1. Scope of the judgment of this court;

A. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff filed the same claim against the Defendants as stated in the purport of the claim, and the court of the first instance rejected all of the claims on the ground that they are unlawful.

On the other hand, the plaintiff filed an appeal only for the confirmation of the authenticity of a deed, the revocation of a fraudulent act, and the part of the preliminary claim.

B. On the other hand, the Plaintiff primarily added the cancellation registration claim against Defendant B and C, and the claim against the Defendants for monetary payment to Defendant B and C as well as the claim for delivery (return) of special lecture materials (the Tescopon steel) against Defendant B and C, the claim for the return of revised value-added tax on Defendant C and Korea, or the claim for monetary payment against Defendant B, Korea, and the claim for monetary payment against Defendant C and Korea.

C. Therefore, the subject of the judgment of this Court is limited to the claim for confirmation of the authenticity of the deed and the claim for revocation of fraudulent act among the main claim of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, and part of the claim for payment of money among the ancillary claim, as well as the main and ancillary claim added in the trial. Therefore, it is to be determined only

2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the claim for confirmation of the authenticity of a deed and the claim for revocation of a fraudulent act among the main claims of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the pertinent part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Determination ex officio as to the legitimacy of the plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claim added at the trial among the lawsuit of this case

A. The Plaintiff’s judgment as to each claim for cancellation registration (the first part of paragraph 5) was made in the trial, and the Plaintiff’s real estate owned by the Plaintiff against Defendant B and C.