1. The Plaintiff’s appeal against the Defendants and the Defendants’ appeal are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be individually counted.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the facts found to be without dispute between the parties, or according to Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 5, 7, and 10 (including each number), the Daegu Director of the District Tax Office of the first instance, the results of the fact inquiry and the purport of the whole pleadings against the director of the Nam Daegu District Tax Office.

A. The Plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of manufacturing and selling high-priced products.

B. Defendant B received the Plaintiff Company’s actual resignation of Chokro E, the actual resignation of the Plaintiff Company, and was appointed as the representative director of the Plaintiff Company on May 18, 2001, and resigned from the office of representative director on June 9, 201.

C. The amount of credit account receivable has been continuously accumulated because the Plaintiff supplied goods to several business partners including F (Representative G) but failed to receive the price. While Defendant B judged that it is practically difficult to recover the price of goods from the said business partners, it was likely that the sales of the Plaintiff Company would have decreased due to the decrease in the sales of the Plaintiff Company, and that it would have a negative impact on the Plaintiff Company E due to the decrease in the sales of the Plaintiff Company in the event of suspending the supply of goods to the said business partners and disposing of the bad debt.

Therefore, Defendant B collected the representatives of insolvent business partners, including G, and the employees of the Plaintiff who managed the said defective business partners, and raised funds from them, and Defendant C, the representative director of H, the Plaintiff’s existing business partners, established D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) on April 2, 199.

From the date of establishment of D, the Plaintiff supplied goods to D instead of supplying goods to the existing defective customers according to the purport of Defendant B, the representative director (as stated in attached Table (i) the amount of credit account receivable against the Plaintiff as of the end of 2002, the amount of KRW 267,469,956, and the amount of KRW 1 billion after 2003) and D supplied the said goods to the Plaintiff’s customers or to the new customers.