2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

In this regard, the plaintiffs did not appeal against the dismissal of the claim for damages on property due to forced sale targets, and appealed against the remainder.

Therefore, the scope of this Court's adjudication is limited to the claim for damages due to the termination of the above unfair contract by plaintiffs A, C, E, I, and L, and the plaintiffs' claim for consolation money.

2. The reasoning for this part of the reasoning is as stated in Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition or modification of a part of the reasoning as follows. Thus, this part of the reasoning is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The following shall be added to the sixth five pages of the first instance judgment:

“E. The Plaintiff et al. filed a complaint with Defendant representative director regarding the enforcement of the Defendant’s sales goal and the termination of the contract’s unfair termination (this criminal case is referred to as “related criminal case”).

A) The suspicion of violation of the Fair Trade Act (the enforcement of the sales target), and X et al. interfered with the operation of each wholesale store by unilaterally terminating the wholesale store contract with the Y, Z, AA and Plaintiff C, I, L, A, and E, and unilaterally setting the sales target from February 2009 to cancel the contract when the sales target falls short of the sales target.

‘Business obstruction', ② Emba, Emba, Musan Wholesale Store Co., Ltd., Y, Z, and AA, by unfairly taking advantage of the transaction position, provided an disadvantages to unilaterally terminate the continuous transaction relationship with the other party.

"The trade secret" is a violation of the Fair Trade Act, 3. The wholesale store managers enter the wholesale store computer system, and trade secrets such as transaction partners information and sales information.