A. The Defendant is a company established to run financial investment business, such as investment trading business, investment brokerage business, discretionary investment business, and investment advisory business as prescribed by the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act.

B. B was employed by the Defendant on June 25, 2002, and served as the vice head from April 1, 2008 to December 22, 2016 at Defendant leisure point or leisure point (hereinafter “instant business establishment”) and was in charge of the sales of stocks and the sales of financial instruments.

C. From around 2008 to 2016, the Plaintiffs sought explanation from B that they will be able to earn profits and be guaranteed principal when investing in derivatives, such as futures options, such as futures options, as indicated in the attached table, and deposited the same money as stated in B’s name C account (Account Number AI; hereinafter referred to as “instant account”). In the attached table, the Plaintiffs deposited the same money in the name of investment (hereinafter referred to as “instant investment”).

B was sentenced to seven years of imprisonment with prison labor from the Gwangju District Court's Macheon Branch (2016 Ma253, etc.) on June 8, 2017, on the following grounds: (a) it was convicted of criminal facts: (b) it was sentenced to seven years of imprisonment with prison labor from the Gwangju District Court's Macheon Branch (2016 Ma253, etc.) to 46 persons including the Plaintiffs from 2008 to 2016.

B filed an appeal against the judgment of the first instance with the Gwangju High Court 2017No301, but the Gwangju High Court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal under B on December 21, 2017, and the judgment of the first instance became final and conclusive on December 29, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 32, testimony of witness B of the first instance court, significant facts in this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the plaintiff K, N, R, T, U, and W (hereinafter "Plaintiff K, etc.")'s claim

A. The 1-related legal doctrine regarding the occurrence of liability for damages is an element of employer liability as stipulated in Article 756 of the Civil Act.