1. The judgment of the first instance court, including the Plaintiff’s claim expanded by this court, is modified as follows.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the judgment of the court of first instance, is as follows, with the exception that the court of first instance partially renders the reasons for the judgment as follows:

Therefore, it is accepted by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act as it is.

[Attachment 3: 11: 3: (a) part of the judgment of the court of first instance, “Plaintiff (which was changed to the trade name as of November 16, 201)” (the trade name at the time was changed to the Hyundai Savings Bank of Korea, but was changed to the time of November 16, 2017 as of November 20, 201): 11: 3: 4: (b) the entire number of 11: 3: (c) the first instance judgment, “No one of the commercial buildings in this case, was sold to KRW 2,210,820,00, and was transferred to the company: 2,194,64,530; (d) the remaining portion of the judgment, as of November 20, 2017; (e) the remaining portion of the judgment of the court of first instance, 3:3: (e) the remaining portion of the judgment, 4:3: (g) the remaining portion of the judgment of the court of the court of first instance, 2: 3: the remaining 4:

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 84Meu1864, Mar. 26, 1985). However, on June 7, 2010, the Defendant rendered the instant commercial building.