1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The court's explanation of this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing this case as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

However, in the following cases, part of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed, and the judgment on the plaintiff's assertion is added to this court or new argument.

2. The portion of the first instance judgment 4-7 to 10 - 7 of the 4th 7th 10 judgment, "the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 425,00,000,000 remaining excluding the amount of KRW 20,000,000 returned by the plaintiff among the total sum of the investment principal paid by the plaintiff 445,00,000,000, and damages for delay after each payment day." "the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 30,000,000 converted to E's investment amount according to the business agreement of this case and the amount of KRW 330,00,000,000 deposited into the G account as the defendant's wife around September 30, 2015."

3. Additional determination on the Plaintiff’s assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the instant partnership agreement is not a partnership agreement, but an agreement on the refund of investment money to receive an amount of investment money not returned under the instant investment agreement, even in the court as to the interpretation of the instant partnership agreement.

However, the judgment of the court of first instance is "3.

A. In addition to the following circumstances in the item of "the interpretation of the instant trade agreement" as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, the instant trade agreement shall be deemed as a trade agreement for E.

1) The instant agreement on the business of the instant case (According to Section 1(5) of the evidence No. 1), not only the Defendant but also the Plaintiff, as well as the Plaintiff, intended to share the operating fund and divide profits according to shares after the exhaustion of raw and secondary materials

Therefore, the instant partnership agreement is not a form in which the Plaintiff pays investment to the Defendant and the Defendant guarantees certain profits to the Plaintiff, but it invests both the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and receives profits according to the investment ratio.