1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following two cases as to the Plaintiff’s grounds for appeal and the Plaintiff’s additional assertion of the court of first instance. Thus, this is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination

A. The grounds for appeal merely offered the above land and the above multi-household house to be newly built as collateral by borrowing money from the Defendant in order to build a new multi-household house in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B and C, and the legal nature of the revised agreement on April 26, 201 is an accord for payment in kind, and thus, the Plaintiff is seeking payment of KRW 92,9020,000 as liquidation money pursuant to Article 4 of the Provisional Registration Security Act.

In light of the following circumstances, evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 2, comprehensively considering the purport of the entire pleadings as stated in the evidence No. 2, it is reasonable to view that the agreement of July 30, 2009 (hereinafter “instant agreement”) and the amendment agreement of April 26, 201 (hereinafter “instant amendment agreement”) as the internal partnership agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, it is reasonable to view the agreement as the internal partnership agreement of April 26, 201, and thus, it cannot be applied to the provisional registration security act, etc., and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is rejected.

1) The instant agreement and the instant modified agreement only stipulate that the Defendant receives a distribution of profits in connection with the building-sale business of multi-family housing, and do not stipulate that loans shall be returned. 2) The association agreement under the Civil Act is a contract under which two or more persons mutually invest and jointly operate a business, and is limited to the agreement that jointly runs a specific business, and the extent that it is the purpose of the common agreement cannot be deemed as satisfying the requirements for establishment of the association.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da79729 Decided February 11, 2010). If a member of an enterprise has interests to other members, regardless of whether it has interests to other members.