1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. In accordance with the expansion of the purport of the claim in the trial, Defendant C is June 6, to the Plaintiff.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation as to this case are as follows: "The defendant Eul requested to leave the court of first instance" of the first instance No. 16, 17 of the third 3th 3th 17th 17th 3th 17th 17th 1st 502 502, without complying with the above request to leave the court, but the defendant C occupied 502th 502 50th 1st 2015 20th 3th 19 and 20th 20th 3th 20 of the first 3th 1st 200, "the defendant Eul requested to leave the court, but the defendant did not comply with the request, occupied 203 203th 203 and removed from the court of first 4th 12th 2016 20th 4th 200 2th 2012.

2. According to the facts acknowledged prior to the determination on the cause of the claim on March 3, 201, the part of the first instance court's decision No. 4, No. 9, and No. 12, "the judgment on the cause of the claim" was made as follows. According to the agreement on each of the instant agreements, barring any special circumstance, Defendant B is obligated to pay the Plaintiff 2,50,000 won (=50,000 won every month x 50,000 won from October 9, 2010 on the day following the day when the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant land x 45,50,00 won, and Defendant C is obligated to pay damages for delay as requested by the Plaintiff (i.e., KRW 50,00 per month x for the period from October 9, 2010 to 57) and for the period from October 6, 2010 following the day when the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant land).

5. Thus, the conclusion is as follows: ① Defendant B’s KRW 22.5 million against the Plaintiff and the instant case.