1. Both the Plaintiff’s appeal against Defendant C Co., Ltd and the Plaintiff’s appeal against Defendant B.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is the same as that of the first instance court's decision, except for the dismissal or addition as stated in paragraph (2). Thus, the reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning which dismissal or addition is made shall be as follows: “Defendant B” shall be as “Defendant B” in the third column of the judgment of the court of first instance.

Part VI of the judgment of the first instance court shall add the following details to the third part:

The Plaintiff, as seen above, clearly indicated that the Plaintiff did not intend to perform the obligation to pay the balance by demanding the Defendant B to perform the obligation to pay the remainder of the name of the lessee.

Therefore, in this respect, the notification of cancellation of this case is legitimate.

In the first instance court's decision, "the real estate development project is carried out by a method" in the first sentence of 21 to 7, the second sentence of the first instance court's decision shall be "the real estate development project in a method".

The part of the proviso of Article 4 of the Special Agreement of this case (all the expenses for the name map shall be borne by the F) was agreed to pay the expenses for the name of the lessee to Defendant B, beyond determining the obligation of F to bear the expenses for the name of the tenant who is a prop seter.

It is difficult to interpret that the Plaintiff agreed to pay the lessee’s name even before Defendant B’s name as the lessee.

Article 4 of the terms of the instant special agreement stipulates that the name of the lessee shall be borne by the F when specifying that the obligation of the tenant is against the Defendant B, and that the F affixed the seal to the sales contract as a witness, it is natural to interpret the terms of the said special agreement that the Defendant B is liable for the name of the tenant, but the F is also liable for the name of the tenant to the Defendant B.

Even if F is expected to enter into a service contract with the Plaintiff, it is partially paid in advance by the Plaintiff as a prop worker.