1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. Defendant C shall be paid KRW 300,000,000 from the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff in Dong-dong.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation as to this part of the underlying facts and the party’s assertion is as follows: (a) the “responding 61 square meters” in the second part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the “instant case” in the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the “1. Basic Facts” and the “party’s assertion” (Articles 11 through 13 et al.). Therefore, the pertinent part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, inasmuch as the said part is deemed to be “81 square meters,” and the “instant case

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Whether the purchase price paid pursuant to the instant sales contract was paid as the purchase price for the instant secondary sales contract or not, as seen in the foregoing cited part, the Defendants agreed with the Plaintiffs to convert the purchase price of KRW 70 million, plus KRW 30 million, which was paid as of August 27, 2015 according to the instant sales contract, into the borrowed amount (the said certificate was prepared as of August 27, 2015, and as of August 27, 2015).

() The above KRW 700 million is not paid as the purchase price of the instant secondary sales contract. The Plaintiffs asserted that the loan certificate of this case was prepared against the Defendant for the total amount of KRW 400 million calculated as the loan amount (= KRW 500,000 per month x 12 months x 5 years) calculated as the loan amount (= KRW 400,000 won, KRW 670,000,000 and KRW 30,000,000,000 paid pursuant to the instant first sales contract, which was paid on August 27, 2015, and KRW 200,000,000,000 won, which was paid on August 27, 2015, and KRW 300,000,000,000,000 won, which was paid on the loan certificate of this case, regardless of the loan certificate of this case, and KRW 300,000,00.