All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to Defendant C Accounting Corporation’s ground of appeal No. 1

A. As to the Plaintiff’s claim for damages against Defendant C Accounting Corporation (hereinafter “Defendant Accounting Corporation”) under Article 170(1) of the former Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (amended by Act No. 12383, Jan. 28, 2014; hereinafter “former Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act”) and Article 17(2) of the former Act on External Audit of Stock Companies (amended by Act No. 12148, Dec. 30, 2013; hereinafter “former External Audit Act”), the lower court determined that the Defendant Accounting Corporation neglected to perform its duties as an auditor by failing to discover sufficient and adequate evidence at the time of conducting external audits of Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) and Article 17(2) of the former External Audit Act, taking into account the facts stated in its reasoning.

B. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the standard of determining whether an auditor was negligent in performing audit duties, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2 by Defendant accounting corporation

A. The liability of an auditor for damages under Article 170(1) of the former Capital Markets Act and Article 17(2) of the former External Audit Act is recognized in cases where an auditor intentionally or negligently failed to enter important matters in an audit report or makes a false statement in an audit report, as well as where an auditor fails to enter important matters or makes a false statement.

B. The court below held that.