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

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

purport.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the first instance is that of the first instance court except for the following dismissal, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts dried up shall be dried up from 4th judgment of the first instance to 7th 5th one as follows:

① From around 1986, the Plaintiff cultivated fruit trees in H forest land, Hayang-si, Hayang-si, at the level of KRW 3.5 million, and was ordered to Busan post office around May 1989, and sold the said horse to F. The Plaintiff transferred the land to F. Around August 1992, the Plaintiff transferred the land to F. Around March 193, 1993, to F. Around March 1993, the Plaintiff agreed to receive the transfer of the land to F. As a result, the Plaintiff exchanged the land with the land.

However, F provided the instant land as payment in lieu of the price for the cover of the land.

there is no objective evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff and F agreed to exchange the land of this case with the land of this case.

(1) The Plaintiff’s confirmation document submitted by the Plaintiff is that both the Plaintiff’s wife and wife moved from the Plaintiff (the content of the confirmation document submitted by the Plaintiff is merely that the Plaintiff’s wife and wife moved to the Plaintiff). Moreover, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff was the horse that the Plaintiff was going to Defendant B around May 1989, or that there was no talk about the price from around that time to March 1993, the Plaintiff sold the above H forest cultivated to another person, and there was no need to carry out a special horse manufactured for the purpose of moving it to a slope. The Plaintiff also introduced the Defendant’s forest to the purchaser of H forest for one year in the Defendant’s newspaper and introduced it to the Plaintiff who will cultivate the Plaintiff for the first year in lieu of the Plaintiff’s slope, and the Plaintiff’s statement that the Plaintiff was not using the above horse in around 1992, and the Plaintiff paid the price to the Plaintiff for a given period of up to 198 years.