1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

All of the claims filed by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) against the Defendants.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is that the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal or addition as follows, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

[Supplementary or supplementary parts] Each “Plaintiff A” in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deemed to be “Plaintiff”, each “Plaintiff B” to be “Appointed B,” each “Plaintiff C” to be “Appointed C,” and each “Plaintiff D” to be “Appointed D,” respectively.

The third first instance judgment’s “Plaintiffs” in the third instance judgment shall be deemed to be “Plaintiffs, Appointors B, C, and D (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs, etc.”), and each “Plaintiffs” in the third instance judgment shall be deemed to be “Plaintiffs, etc.” and each “Plaintiffs, etc.” in the third instance judgment.

The first instance court’s first instance judgment’s deletion of the first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s withdrawal of the appeal, and the second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s deletion of the first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s “Defendant F, G, and H” (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Defendant, etc.”) was added, and each of the “Defendant, etc.” of the first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s 15, seventh, 8, and 19 first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s 10th to 12th of the first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment. The Prosecutor did not err in the misapprehension of the indictment regarding Defendant G, H’s each forged document, Defendant F’s exercise of indictment documents, and evidence as follows.

Each “this Court” in the fourth, fourth, fourth, fourth, seventh, seventh, 19, and 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be applied respectively to the Daejeon District Court’s Incheon Branch Branch of the District Court.

The fifth-class case of the first-class judgment of the court of first-class, the fifth-class case of the court of first-class to fourteen shall be followed as follows.

On February 21, 2018, the Daejeon District Court revoked the registration of establishment of a mortgage of the neighboring area of this case on February 21, 2018.