The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is citing the summary in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The first instance court codefendant C Co., Ltd. (F Co., Ltd. before the change; hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) shall be used in the first instance court’s joint defendant Co., Ltd. (C regardless of whether it was before and after the change, hereinafter referred to as “C”) and all of the Defendant Co., Ltd. shall be used in the first instance court’s joint defendant Co., Ltd. (F., Ltd. before and after the change.).

The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Nos. 3, 6 and 10 of "Defendant D" are all referred to as "Defendant".

On the 3rd side, the Defendant E was “Defendant E” in the first instance trial, and the Defendant E was written in the 7th page “E”, respectively.

The Court ruled that “The plaintiff appealed (Seoul Central District Court 2019Na21308) later, but the appellate court also dismissed the appeal to the same effect as the first instance court,” which stated that “The plaintiff appealed (Seoul Central District Court 2019Na21308), but the appellate court also rendered a ruling dismissing the plaintiff’s appeal to the same effect as the first instance court, and the plaintiff again appealed (Supreme Court 2020Da208430), but the appellate court rendered a new appeal (Supreme Court 2020Da208430, May 14, 2020).”

Y 10, 18, 11, 4, e.g., e., the following:

The Plaintiff asserts that “A,” rather than based on the instant contract, the Plaintiff sought payment of the purchase price of this case against the Defendant pursuant to a separate agreement entered into with the Defendant through the preparation of the instant debt statement. However, first of all, as shown in the Plaintiff’s above assertion, the part of the evidence No. 30 (written confirmation) [specificly, the Defendant is “personal qualification” on October 24, 2014.