1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

All of the claims of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) are dismissed.

2. Action.

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff (appointed party) in the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence presented by the plaintiff (appointed party) in the court of first instance is presented to this court, the fact-finding and the judgment of the court of first instance are justified.

Therefore, this court's reasoning is as follows, except where the plaintiff (appointed party) adds a judgment as to the newly asserted part in this court as referred to in paragraph (2). Thus, this court's reasoning is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, it is cited as it is by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

An abbreviationd name established in the judgment of the first instance is also used below the same.

[Supplementary or added parts] In accordance with the selection of the parties at the trial, “Plaintiff A” shall be deemed to be “Plaintiff (Appointed Party)”, “Plaintiff B” to be “Appointed Party”, and “Plaintiffs” to “Plaintiffs (Appointed Party) and Appointed Party”.

In the third instance judgment, the second instance judgment "Article 545 (1) of the Civil Act" shall be subject to the second instance judgment "Article 454 (1) of the Civil Act".

Part 4 of the first instance judgment, the following matters shall be added between "I" and "Ial" in Part 12 of the first instance judgment:

“A lack to deem that there was an arrangement to assume obligations, as alleged by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party), with respect to each description or image of the evidence Nos. 25, 27, 28, 29, 34, 35, and 36 (including a serial number, if any) submitted by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) to this Court is insufficient to deem that there was an arrangement to assume obligations, as alleged by the Plaintiff

2. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s additional determination on the plaintiff's assertion in this court

A. The summary of the plaintiff (Appointed Party)'s assertion 1) regardless of whether the contract for the transfer of business rights between the defendant and D has been cancelled, the defendant committed a tort, such as using the intellectual property, such as the like like the like placement map and the fluority of D's apartment, and removing the model fluor, etc., so the plaintiff (Appointed Party) who is the creditor of D's creditor, is a tort against D's defendant.