1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning for the judgment on this part of the basic facts is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. The plaintiffs' claim as to this safety defense is the cause of this case. ① from around 2004 to around 2006, the plaintiff company paid L a total of KRW 1,539,04,073 with restoration expenses related to the forest damaged area, etc. Among them, at least KRW 523,597,000 with the cost of restoring the forest damaged area, etc. calculated by the Madsan Gun, and the sum of restoration expenses deposited by the plaintiff company. ② On December 31, 2002, the plaintiff company subrogated for KRW 78,00,000 with the defendant's loans to the Gasan Mutual Savings Bank on December 31, 2002, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff's claim as compensation amount of KRW 300,798,500 (=601,597,000 x 1/2) and damages for delay, and the defendant and the defendant are not obliged to pay the plaintiffs' rights protection interest in each of this case.

However, as seen in the basic facts, the instant conciliation provision merely states that “the Defendant and D do not bring any civil or criminal lawsuit against the Plaintiffs in connection with each of the instant real estate.” Thus, beyond the agreement that the Defendant did not bring a lawsuit against the Plaintiffs regarding each of the instant real estate, it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiffs agreed to not bring a lawsuit against the Defendant regarding each of the instant real estate.

Therefore, the defendant's main defense is without merit.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. (i) The cost of restoring the forest damaged land in this case is assessed against the cause of the claim.