2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement Nos. 1 and 2, the Plaintiff’s statement from Defendant C that “I would play a serious role in the film “D” that deals with the liverity of the film production case if I invest KRW 30 million in the film production,” and that on November 18, 2014, I remitted KRW 30 million to Defendant C Co., Ltd.; however, it is recognized that the Defendants did not make the Plaintiff contribute to the film.

However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the Defendants comprehensively taking account of Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 6 (including each number), namely, the following circumstances: (a) it appears that the Defendants did not produce motion pictures due to the Plaintiff’s scenarios and the distribution situation after the Defendants’ office; and (b) the Plaintiff’s investment contract prepared with Defendant B, stated that “the Plaintiff shall make best efforts to recover principal at the next time when the production problem arises; (c) the Defendants offered the Plaintiff’s contribution to the “E” for the next time; (d) the Defendants filed a fraudulent complaint against the Defendants, but the Defendants were subject to a disposition of suspicion by the prosecutor of the Seoul Northern District Prosecutors’ Office on August 26, 2016, it is difficult to accept the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendants deceiving the Plaintiff and obtained the instant motion picture production costs.

3. If so, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate with this conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed in entirety.