1. As to KRW 65,496,461 and KRW 48,374,510 among the Plaintiff, Defendant A shall start on November 28, 2015, and the remainder 17,121.

1. Claim against the defendant A;

(a)as shown in the reasons for the attachment of the claim;

(b) Judgment by service based on which recognition is applicable (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Claim against the defendant B

A. Basic facts 1) Defendant A served as an employee in charge of the Plaintiff’s accounting and accounting from June 2010 to February 28, 2014. (2) Defendant A embezzled an amount equivalent to KRW 131,774,510 in total, including transfer of funds under his/her occupational custody for the Plaintiff from September 9, 201 to February 18, 2014 to the Defendants’ account, and use them for personal purposes.

3) On April 15, 2015, Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months in the course of occupational embezzlement and two years in the suspension of execution for criminal facts identical to the preceding paragraph from the Yeongdeungpo District Court Young-gu District Court (Seoul High Court Decision 2014Ma177). The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time. [The entry of evidence A, significant facts in this Court, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion argues to the effect that “Defendant B, as his spouse, committed an occupational embezzlement jointly with Defendant A, and thus, Defendant B is jointly and severally liable for the Plaintiff’s damage.”

The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that Defendant B conspired or participated in a tort committed by Defendant A, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant A is justified, and the claim against the defendant B is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.