1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of each art work listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant art work”), and the co-defendant D of the first instance trial (hereinafter “D”) is a person who has been engaged in the trade of art work in the Seoul Kdong Group, and the Defendants operate a ditch with the trade name “L” and are engaged in the trade of art work.

B. D around May 7, 2009, upon receiving a request from the Plaintiff for the sale of the second art works owned by the Plaintiff, D referred to as “B for the fee to sell the second art works and sell the second art works for a period of one month.” Accordingly, the Plaintiff requested D to sell the second art works, and delivered all of them. However, even if D received the second art works from the Plaintiff at the time, it did not have the intent or ability to sell them to third parties within one month, and it was thought that D borrowed money as security.

C. 1) D’s loan from Defendant C, which was known through the introduction of Defendant B, totaling KRW 75,00,000 from May 22, 2009 to July 30, 2009, KRW 75,000,00 on three occasions, as of October 24, 2009, and as a security, as indicated in paragraph (1) E of the attached Table among the instant art works (hereinafter “E”).

(B) G of F listed in Schedule 2 (hereinafter “G”).

) H of Schedule F as stated in Schedule 3 (hereinafter “H”)

IJ (hereinafter referred to as the “J”) set forth in Section 4 of the Schedule.

(2) On August 24, 2009, D, as a witness, borrowed KRW 75,00,00 from Nonparty C, the father of Defendant C, and deliver E, G, and H as a security, and if the payment is not made by October 24, 2009, it would give up the rights to each of the above art works and transfer them to M, and thus, it is almost the same as the provision of loans and securities from Defendant C.