A. The reasons why the court has cited this part of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: (1) The judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed.

section 3(f) of the first instance court’s decision shall be deleted, and 2.3(f) shall be subsequent to

In addition to adding evidence No. 6, evidence No. 15, and evidence No. 16 to the column of judgment No. 3 of the first instance court, it is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of judgment of the first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. On the other hand, on November 10, 2017, the Plaintiff added KRW 14,720,45,362 from the Busan High Court, which is the appellate court of the above Ulsan District Court 2014Dhap250,204Dhap267 (Counterclaim) on November 10, 2017. ① The Plaintiff’s active value of the Plaintiff’s property is KRW 14,720,45,362, and the negative value of the property is the tax liability of the domestic branch, which includes KRW 1,09,025,79,000 (Evidence 16, No. 24, No. 17, No. 16, No. 17, and No. 17), KRW 305,00, KRW 164,00,00, KRW 200, KRW 2089, KRW 385, KRW 2985, KRW 405, KRW 2985, and KRW 294585.

[2] Under the name of the Plaintiff and B, the bond account with the Busan Bank was opened as indicated in the following account statement, and was terminated.

H I J K L L L N P P QR T T

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited this part of the instant payment, falls under the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following 2) judgment as to the Plaintiff’s assertion by this court.