beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: “The defendant appears to have mediated the trade of the Gangseo-gu Busan J, etc., owned by I in addition to the intermediation of the sales contract of this case on June 11, 2009.” The defendant's assertion to be emphasized by this court is identical to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following "2. additional determination" as to the assertion to be emphasized by this court. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. The summary of the claim is whether the payment of this case was made as expenses for road construction and interest, and the plaintiff is a joint purchaser of the land of this case. The plaintiff paid the payment of this case to the defendant who is a joint purchaser in order to promptly dispose of the land of this case under the pretext of expenses for road construction and interest on the secured debt of the right to collateral security established on the land of this case. 2) First of all, the defendant is a joint purchaser of the land of this case. According to each of the evidence Nos. 2, 10, and 11, it is acknowledged that the defendant and D, and C agreed to jointly invest and purchase the land of this case on January 20, 209. However, in full view of the fact that this is merely a separate agreement between the defendant, D, and C, which are unrelated to the plaintiff, and the written contract of this case is merely a separate agreement between the defendant, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant concluded the sales contract of this case with the knowledge that it is a purchaser of the land of this case. b)
According to the statements in Gap's evidence No. 4 and K's testimony of the party witness K, the defendant can be found to have performed road expansion and flat work on the ground of the land of this case after the conclusion of the contract of this case.
However, the evidence mentioned above, A.