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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

the reasons for the decision of the court of first instance.

2.(c)

2) The part of paragraphs (1) through (3) (from the fifth to the fifth fifth of the judgment of the court of first instance) shall be revised as follows. ① The Plaintiff’s transfer of shares and management rights to the non-party company according to the instant contract is the shares and management rights. The Plaintiff still held shares and management rights before and after the time of the instant notice of cancellation as well as the conclusion of the instant contract.

② In this regard, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the value of stocks was reduced, but no circumstance exists to deem that the value of assets B, including the right to extract deadly mines, was changed from the time of the instant contract to the time of notification of cancellation of the instant case.

In light of the fact that the company's stock value reflects the company's asset value, it is proved that the stock value did not decline between the above point of time. Therefore, it is judged that the Plaintiff did not have any damage caused by the decline in stock value.

③ The substance of the decline in the stock value claimed by the Plaintiff is that “A share value was zero (0) won as the Plaintiff’s local subsidiary was closed from September 2010, which was about one year after the notification of the cancellation of the instant case.” As seen later, as long as the time when the contract of this case was cancelled (the time when penalty is reverted) is deemed to be the time when the notification of the cancellation of the instant contract was given, it is merely a situation that occurred after the cancellation of the contract with the Nonparty Company

④ The Plaintiff’s assertion on domestic affairs is false and publicly announced by the non-party company during the rescission of the instant contract.