1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that operates high-tech performances and exhibition business, and the Defendant is a company that operates exhibition hall leasing business.

B. Around July 26, 2012, the Defendant entered into a real estate security trust contract between the Defendant and the Korea Exchange Bank. Around July 26, 2012, the Korea Exchange Bank Co., Ltd., the Korea Exchange Bank Co., Ltd., and the Korea Exchange Bank, a trust business entity of the Korea Exchange Bank, etc. were merged into the Korea Exchange Bank on September 1, 2015, and on the same day, the Korea Exchange Bank (hereinafter “Korea Exchange Bank”) was incorporated into the Korea Exchange Bank on the same day.

(1) The Korea Exchange Bank (hereinafter referred to as “Korea Exchange Bank”);

A) Between the Defendant and Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, and four parcels of ground reinforced concrete structure (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) 85-24 and 4 parcels of ground reinforced concrete structure, each of which is owned by the Defendant.

B) The trust period is from July 27, 2012 to August 31, 2015; the Korea Exchange Bank (Personnel Dong Branch) Korea Exchange Bank (Personnel Dong Branch) for the first beneficiary of the joint trust principal of the first trust; the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives (the amount of KRW 13 billion issued in a certificate); the new Savings Bank (the amount of KRW 6.5 billion issued in a certificate); the new Savings Bank (the amount of KRW 6.5 billion in total) for the first beneficiary of the joint trust principal; and

(2) The first beneficiary of the second trust principal is Homato2 Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (the amount of KRW 3.51 billion issued in a certificate) (hereinafter “the second beneficiary”), and the first beneficiary is the first beneficiary and the first beneficiary, collectively, “the first beneficiary.”

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the presumption of trust, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the presumption of trust, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal, contrary to what is alleged in the ground of appeal.

The instant trust agreement was concluded. The main contents of the instant trust agreement are as follows. Article 4 (Beneficiary ①).