1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasons for this case, such as the quotation of the judgment of the court of first instance, are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition or dismissal as follows. Thus, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

At the bottom of the second judgment of the court of first instance, the term "the plaintiff company" (hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff company") shall be read as "the comprehensive construction company of sexual friendship" (hereinafter referred to as "the comprehensive construction of sexual friendship"), and the term "the plaintiff company" in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be read as "the comprehensive construction of sexual friendship".

In the second end, at the end of six (6) proceedings, the first instance court appointed A as a manager of the Construction of the Debtor for Gender Mad Co., Ltd. on September 25, 2015, but the manager was changed to B on April 28, 2017 while the first instance court was continuing, B took over the proceedings of this case. On November 1, 2017, the first instance court received a decision to terminate the rehabilitation procedure from the rehabilitation court and taken over the proceedings of this case, and on March 12, 2018, sexual Mad Co., Ltd. was merged into the Plaintiff (the company at the time was the main company of Busan, but was changed to the Plaintiff on March 31, 2018) and added the Plaintiff’s taking over the proceedings of this case.

At the bottom of the 8th parallel, “No evidence exists to acknowledge an agreement to be borne by the Plaintiff Company exceeding KRW 1,00,000,000” is deemed as follows: “No evidence to acknowledge an agreement to be borne by the Plaintiff Company”; and the testimony of the witness C alone is insufficient to acknowledge the above assertion by the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.”

At the end of the 9th six parallels, “Aussia Defendant, contrary to the foregoing provision, has agreed to share the Defendant’s subrogated intermediate payment loans, etc. at a rate of 50:50,” but there is no evidence to prove the Defendant’s above assertion.”

The 10th 7th 13th am as follows. D) The defendant's claim for the sale price is the company, Sosch Rex marketing (hereinafter referred to as "the company").