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 reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the Plaintiff’s additional or supplementary decision as to the part concerning which the Plaintiff claims an additional dispute as the grounds for appeal. As such, it is acceptable to accept it

2. Additional or supplementary judgment

A. Six sellers, including the Plaintiff 1, are relatives within the fourth degree of relationship, who are the former representative director of the Plaintiff, and the former representative director of the Plaintiff, delegated all powers, such as the conclusion of the instant sales contract and the receipt of the sales price, to E, instead of concluding the sales contract individually, and concluded a single sales contract for convenience and entered the entire sales price in a lump sum instead of specifying the sales price for each seller.

However, the substance should be viewed as an individual contract to pay and purchase the shares or land owned by each seller respectively.

Meanwhile, although the sales contract of this case is for the golf course business, the mutual relation between the sales contract of this case from that purpose is not derived immediately from that purpose.

In order for the seller to have an indivisible relationship between the seller and the seller to divide the seller’s obligation to transfer ownership and the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the purchase price, which is the buyer. In light of the fact that the Defendant notifies the other seller of the termination of the contract or filed a lawsuit to confirm the invalidity of the contract, etc., it can be acknowledged that the instant sales contract had no intention to make it indivisible with the other seller

Although the purchase price of each seller was not specified, the plaintiff is 27% for the defendant, who is the third house, and 33% for E, D, 10 billion won, 40% for the second house, G, H, and F, and 33% for the third house.