1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s appeal against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) J and Defendant D and Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) E.

1. The scope of this Court’s trial at the first instance trial, as the principal lawsuit, sought confirmation of the claim for payment of deposit money as stated in the “claim of the principal lawsuit” against the Defendants and the co-defendant F, G, H, and I of the first instance trial. Defendant J, as a counterclaim, sought a return of unjust enrichment, such as the statement of “the claim for payment of deposit money” in the “claim of the Defendant J’s counterclaim,” and the conjunctively, against the Plaintiffs, as to the Plaintiff C, the confirmation of the claim for payment of deposit money, such as the “the claim for payment of deposit” in the “claim of the Defendant J’s counterclaim.”

However, the court of first instance partially accepted the plaintiffs' claim of main lawsuit, dismissed the defendant J's claim of main counterclaim, and partly accepted the conjunctive counterclaim claim.

In this regard, only the plaintiff C, the defendant D, and the defendant E appealed against their respective losing parts, so this Court's judgment is limited to the plaintiffs' principal lawsuit, the defendant J's preliminary counterclaim and the counterclaim claim filed by the defendant E in the trial.

2. The reasons stated in this part are as stated in the first instance court’s judgment “1. Basic Facts”, except for those written by the court as follows. Thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary part] Co-Defendant F, G, H, and I in the first instance trial became final and conclusive as the judgment of the first instance court. As such, “Defendant F, G, H, and I” in the written reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is written by both “F, G, H, and I”.

The "Inheritance Tax" of "Defendant F" in the seventh upper part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be written by adding "347,258,505" to "347,258,921".

B. Paragraph 3 to 4 of the first instance judgment

1. As described in paragraph (a), “as to the description in paragraph (a)” is “Seoul Central District Court No. 1701, 201,” and “as to the claims of Section 7.”

1. As described in sub-paragraph (b), “as the Seoul Central District Court 201 gold No. 1702” was written.

3. Determination as to the principal claim and Defendant E’s counterclaim.