1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.

2. The appeal by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is filed.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for adding the following determination to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. As to the main lawsuit, 1) The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion and Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant”).

(2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant are obliged to pay KRW 235,760,377 to the Plaintiff upon implementation under the above agreement, without undergoing the liquidation procedure, since they agreed to dissolve the instant association on July 15, 2013, and agreed to divide the residual property, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 235,760,377 to the Plaintiff as a result of implementation under the above agreement. 2) Since all of the provisions concerning the liquidation of the judgment association are discretionary provisions, it is also possible to dispose of the partnership’s property in an appropriate manner without undergoing any special procedure such as liquidation upon the unanimous agreement of all union members (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 66Da1509, Sept. 27, 196; 92Da21098, Feb. 9, 1993).

The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

B. 1) As to the counterclaim, it is practically difficult for the Plaintiff to go through the liquidation procedures of the instant association because the gist of the Defendant’s assertion was not in cooperation with the liquidation procedures, and as long as it is impossible to appoint a liquidator to perform the liquidation affairs (the Defendant applied for the appointment of the Defendant as a liquidator with respect to the instant association under the Suwon District Court Branch Decision 2016Bhap4013, Sept. 1, 2016, the said court dismissed the said application, and the Defendant filed an appeal with Seoul High Court Decision 2016Ra2134, Oct. 27, 2016, the said court dismissed the appeal.

(2) The Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 134,590,346 to the Defendant for the distribution or settlement of the remaining assets of the instant association without undergoing the liquidation procedures. (2) When the association is dissolved under the Civil Act, in principle, all the members of the instant association.