2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. Defendant C’s claim for damages following the embezzlement by Defendant C served as an employee of the Plaintiff Company “E” and consulting company operated by the Plaintiff, and embezzled KRW 7,498,000 upon receiving the sales price of the said company from October 2012 to December 2013 from around December 2013.

Therefore, Defendant C should pay the amount to Plaintiff A as compensation for tort.

B. Defendant C filed a claim for damages due to the Defendants’ defamation, but dismissed on or around February 2016, the Defendants, along with Defendant D, who was his husband, damaged the reputation of Plaintiff A as follows.

In other words, in order to work as an "E" and franchise, A's representative has embezzled the company's public funds in order to have the company cease to work for a short period of time.

How much I would have been able to work until now when I embezzled. A representative makes a false representation.

‘The words ‘' means.

According to such defamation, the Defendants should jointly pay damages of KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff Company was established around June 2015, and Defendant C became an employee of the Plaintiff Company, and Defendant C, the husband of Defendant C, operated the “F” of the photographic photographer Company in transactions with the Plaintiff Company.

Defendant C made a false document different from the terms of the contract entered into with a customer and reported it to the Plaintiff Company, thereby making Defendant D settle the amount higher than the original contract amount, thereby making Defendant C obtain unjust enrichment of KRW 5,160,000, and the Plaintiff Company suffered losses equivalent to that amount.

Therefore, the Defendants should jointly return the unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff.

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff A, who was not recognized as embezzlement by the defendant C, is the customer of the defendant C embezzlement.