A. In the first instance court, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the defendants against the defendants against the CAV 06-7813 specific performance of the CAS and the CAS's attorney's fees and cos cases on January 15, 2009, for which the U.S. court filed a lawsuit seeking permission for compulsory execution in accordance with the sentence of the attached judgment, and the first instance court accepted the plaintiffs' claims. The first instance court accepted all of the plaintiffs' claims.

B. Accordingly, only the Defendants appealed, and this Court revoked the first instance judgment before the remand and dismissed all of the Plaintiffs’ instant lawsuit against the Defendants.

C. Accordingly, only the Plaintiffs appealed, and the judgment of remand reversed the part on attorney’s fees and expenses in the judgment before remanding, and remanded this part to this court.

Therefore, since the claim for specific performance, which is not subject to reversal and return, is separated and finalized at the same time with the declaration of remand, the scope of this court's trial after remand is limited to the claim for attorney's fees and expenses.

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. Since the Defendants’ assertion has already lost their legal capacity before filing the instant lawsuit, the instant lawsuit is unlawful.

B. 1) The decision of the governing law in this case is based on the legal principle that: (a) the Plaintiffs, which are corporations established under the laws of California, seek the recognition of foreign judgments and the judgment of execution against the Defendants, a corporation established under the laws of the Republic of Korea, and the Defendants, who are the nationals of the corporations established under the laws of the Republic of Korea; and (b) the legal entity’s ability to become the Plaintiff and the Defendant under the Civil Procedure Act is deemed to have the capacity under the law of lawsuit