Basic Facts

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows: (a) the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance (from No. 3 to No. 4) is the same as that of the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance (from No. 9 to No. 1 of the Table No. 4); and (b) such part is cited by the main text of

Part 3, "A" in Part 1 shall be added to "A".

In Part 4, "Entrusted Person" in Part 3 shall be added to "Entrusted Person A (Plaintiff A)".

The 5th in the table of the third side "A trustee: B" shall be replaced by "A (the defendant)".

The plaintiff A among the whole damages under the grounds for the claim of the parties as set forth below shall not exceed 150,000,000 won and the plaintiff B shall not exceed 50,000,000 won.

The reasons why the court should explain this part of the claim for damages arising from the violation of the instant research contract are as stated in the relevant part of the reasons of the first instance judgment (Articles 5 to 6, 12) except for the case where the judgment of the court of first instance was accepted as follows. Thus, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part 5 Sheet "(1-0.89) x (1-0.89) x (1-0.89) x (1-0.89) , and (2) ....

Part 6 "[((85,385,830 won 22,00,000)] x (1 - 0.89) x (2,00,000 won) x (1 - - 0.89) x (1 - 0.89 and 85,385,830 won 22,00,000 won).

The plaintiffs bear the cost of repairing defects of KRW 127,596,670 due to the defect in the product supplied by the defendant due to the defect in the product.

In addition, the defendant did not transfer the development outcomes and the plaintiffs paid additional development costs equivalent to KRW 137,202,30.

Ultimately, the defendant should compensate for the above damages.

The defendant, which is the cause of the counterclaim, has the outstanding claim amounting to KRW 79,695,03, and KRW 30,959,467 to Plaintiff A.

However, there is a problem.