The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the reasoning of the first instance judgment as cited by the lower court, the lower court rejected all the Plaintiff’s assertion that the sales of the instant shares constitutes a fraudulent unfair trading as an act of significantly affecting the price of the shares to be formed independently in the market for its own interest, and constitutes an unfair trading based on fraud, as it constitutes an act of significantly affecting the price of the shares to be formed independently in the market, and constitutes an unfair trading based on fraud, as it constitutes an act of significantly affecting the price of the shares to be formed independently in the market for its own interest by forming KRW 45,651, the base price for redemption at maturity.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on whether the act of cross-marketing or unfair

2. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.