1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendant C and the defendant C's appeal are dismissed, respectively.

2. The plaintiff as added by this court.

1. The reasoning for this part of this Court is as follows, and the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (as stated in the part on the basis of “1. Basic Facts”) is the same as that of the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing the summary language under the main sentence of Article

[Attachment] The first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s second instance judgment was divided and then added “D land” (hereinafter “D land”).

Part 3 of the judgment of the first instance court is "after the division" in Part 16 of the judgment of the first instance, and the "O-owned land" is added to all "after the division" (hereinafter referred to as "O-owned land").

2. The parties' assertion

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) the Plaintiff, Defendant C, H, I, J, and X (hereinafter “six persons including the Plaintiff”) made a contribution of KRW 200 million each, with a loan from the K Association, and entered into a trade agreement with the K Association to jointly purchase and sell and divide profits from the purchase of the land if the market price is erroneous. In the process, the Defendant C borrowed KRW 200 million from the Plaintiff, and the above loan amount came due as the land was sold to N by auction.

Therefore, Defendant C is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above loan amount of KRW 200 million and the damages for delay.

(2) The Plaintiff, Defendant C, I, V, and W (hereinafter “five persons, including the Plaintiff”) made a loan from the KU and agreed to jointly purchase the OU land by contributing to KRW 350 million and then sell the OU land and divide the profits from the sale of the OU land if the market price is calculated later (hereinafter “instant business agreement”), and agreed to preferentially repay the KU loan out of the purchase price of the OU land and then repay the Plaintiff KRW 350 million to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, Defendant C shall be entitled to the Plaintiff’s preferential repayment agreement in accordance with the foregoing preferential repayment agreement.