1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the basic facts are the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The defendants' assertion that the lawsuit of this case filed against the defendants' individual, despite the plaintiff's being a shareholder of T, is unlawful as a lawsuit filed against the non-party standing.

However, in the lawsuit of performance, the plaintiff's own assertion that the standing to be a party is nominal, and the person who asserts his/her right to claim for payment is a legitimate plaintiff, and the person who alleged as the obligor is the legitimate defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 94Da14797, Jun. 14, 1994). In this case, the plaintiff claims the return of investment amount with the lawsuit of performance against the defendants.

Therefore, the defendants' main defense is without merit.

3. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the judgment on the cause of the claim are as stated in the part of the 5th judgment of the first instance to the 12th 3rd of the 5th judgment, except for dismissal, addition, and deletion as follows. Thus, this part of the judgment of the first instance is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Under the 5th page, the "the result of the plaintiff's personal examination" in the second sentence is "the result of the plaintiff's personal examination of the court of first instance", and the last behavior "the result of the defendant's personal examination of the defendant C" is "the result of the part of the defendant's personal examination of the court of first instance against the defendant C".

The 6th last sentence of the investment contract of this case shall be deleted.

The following part shall be added to Chapter 8:

As to this, the Defendants knew that the contents of the contract include the designation of tourist destinations, since they were present at the time of entering into the technical service contract between T and V on November 3, 2009, and the Plaintiff is an urban development project in AB district.