1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified and the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant C, the representative director, Defendant C, the Defendant Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) promoted solar power generation projects.

B. On October 28, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into the instant investment contract with the Defendant Company, “The Defendant Company allocated 20% shares of the Defendant Company to the Plaintiff and invested KRW 500 million in solar power generation projects in the form of the Plaintiff’s acceptance.” The Plaintiff paid to the Defendant Company KRW 20 million on November 3, 2016, KRW 50 million on November 11, 2016, KRW 10 million on March 24, 2017, and KRW 350 million on total.

C. On May 29, 2017 and May 30, 2017, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant Company of the amount of investment KRW 350 million to return, on the ground that the Plaintiff constitutes “where any other serious cause has occurred that makes it difficult to perform this contract” as the grounds for cancellation and termination under the instant investment contract, by deceiving and Embezzlement the Plaintiff’s investment funds, and by embezzlement it constitutes “where any other serious cause has occurred (Article 9(1)3).”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Defendant C used KRW 109,702,221 out of the Plaintiff’s investment amounting to KRW 350,000,000, not for solar power generation projects, individually, and used KRW 30,000 as the maintenance cost of D’s vehicle without the Plaintiff’s consent.

Defendant C, the representative director of the Defendant Company, should compensate for the damages incurred to the Plaintiff (=109,702,221 won) incurred by the Plaintiff by arbitrarily using Defendant C, the representative director of the Company (=30,000 won).

B. As Defendant C agreed to refund the Plaintiff’s investment amounting to KRW 350 million on five occasions from May 26, 2017 to August 31, 2017, Defendant C has to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 350 million.

3. The evidence of this case, such as Gap evidence Nos. 3, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, and Eul evidence Nos. 4-1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 5, 8, 12 through 15, which is acknowledged by considering the whole purport of the pleadings, shall be based on the following circumstances.